Dalton M, Cameron A J, Zimmet P Z, Shaw J E, Jolley D, Dunstan D W, Welborn T A
International Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, Caulfield, Victoria, Australia.
J Intern Med. 2003 Dec;254(6):555-63. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2796.2003.01229.x.
OBJECTIVES: To compare body mass index (BMI), waist circumference and waist-hip ratio (WHR) as indices of obesity and assess the respective associations with type 2 diabetes, hypertension and dyslipidaemia. DESIGN AND SETTING: A national sample of 11 247 Australians aged > or =25 years was examined in 2000 in a cross-sectional survey. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The examination included a fasting blood sample, standard 2-h 75-g oral glucose tolerance test, blood pressure measurements and questionnaires to assess treatment for dyslipidaemia and hypertension. BMI, waist circumference and WHR were measured to assess overweight and obesity. RESULTS: The prevalence of obesity amongst Australian adults defined by BMI, waist circumference and WHR was 20.8, 30.5 and 15.8% respectively. The unadjusted odds ratio for the fourth vs. first quartile of each obesity measurement showed that WHR had the strongest relationship with type 2 diabetes, dyslipidaemia (women only) and hypertension. Following adjustment for age, however, there was little difference between the three measures of obesity, with the possible exceptions of hypertension in women, where BMI had a stronger association, and dyslipidaemia in women and type 2 diabetes in men, where WHR was marginally superior. CONCLUSIONS: Waist circumference, BMI and WHR identified different proportions of the population, as measured by both prevalence of obesity and cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors. Whilst WHR had the strongest correlations with CVD risk factors before adjustment for age, the three obesity measures performed similarly after adjustment for age. Given the difficulty of using age-adjusted associations in the clinical setting, these results suggest that given appropriate cut-off points, WHR is the most useful measure of obesity to use to identify individuals with CVD risk factors.
目的:比较体重指数(BMI)、腰围和腰臀比(WHR)作为肥胖指标,并评估它们与2型糖尿病、高血压和血脂异常的各自关联。 设计与背景:2000年在一项横断面调查中对11247名年龄≥25岁的澳大利亚人进行了全国性抽样检查。 主要观察指标:检查包括空腹血样、标准的2小时75克口服葡萄糖耐量试验、血压测量以及评估血脂异常和高血压治疗情况的问卷。测量BMI、腰围和WHR以评估超重和肥胖情况。 结果:根据BMI、腰围和WHR定义的澳大利亚成年人肥胖患病率分别为20.8%、30.5%和15.8%。每个肥胖测量指标的第四分位数与第一分位数的未调整比值比显示,WHR与2型糖尿病、血脂异常(仅女性)和高血压的关系最为密切。然而,在对年龄进行调整后,这三种肥胖测量指标之间几乎没有差异,可能的例外情况是女性高血压,其中BMI的关联性更强;女性血脂异常和男性2型糖尿病,其中WHR略占优势。 结论:腰围、BMI和WHR确定了不同比例的人群,这通过肥胖患病率和心血管疾病(CVD)危险因素来衡量。虽然在对年龄进行调整之前WHR与CVD危险因素的相关性最强,但在对年龄进行调整后,这三种肥胖测量指标的表现相似。鉴于在临床环境中使用年龄调整后的关联性存在困难,这些结果表明,给定适当的切点,WHR是用于识别具有CVD危险因素个体的最有用的肥胖测量指标。
Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2001-12
Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 1993-7
Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2001-10
J Assoc Physicians India. 2007-9
Health Psychol Behav Med. 2025-8-4
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2025-3-17