Loddo Celine, Pupier Emilie, Amour Rémy, Monsaingeon-Henry Maud, Mohammedi Kamel, Gatta-Cherifi Blandine
Department of Endocrinology, Diabetology and Nutrition, University Hospital of Bordeaux, Haut Leveque Hospital, Pessac, France.
University of Bordeaux, U.F.R. of medical sciences, Bordeaux, France.
PLoS One. 2017 Nov 16;12(11):e0188297. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0188297. eCollection 2017.
Although it is known that the prevalence of obesity is high in deprived patients, the link between deprivation and obesity, and the impact of deprivation on compliance and efficacy of a lifestyle intervention program are not known.
Deprivation was assessed in 40 patients (23 Females, mean±SD age: 49±17 years) from the diabetology department and 140 patients (101 Females, age: 50±15 years) from the nutrition department of Bordeaux University hospital. Eighty-seven patients suffering from obesity were evaluated before and after a tailored, multidisciplinary lifestyle intervention. Deprivation was assessed using EPICES scores. Deprivation was defined with an EPICES score > 30.
Deprived patients suffering from obesity had significantly higher current (43.8 ±8.4 versus 40.9 ± 5.5 kg/m2, p = 0,02) and maximal BMI (46.1± 8.6 versus 42.3± 5.2 kg/m2, p = 0.002) compared to non-deprived obese. Percentage of body weight loss was not different according to deprivation (4.74 ± 0.75 versus 4.65 ± 1.04%, p = 0.9). EPICES scores were not different according to adherence to lifestyle intervention program (20.5 ± 8.5 versus 29.9 ± 3.9 versus 29.0 ±2.5, no follow up versus partial follow up versus total follow up, p = 0,58).
Deprived patients suffering from obesity have a more serious disease than non-deprived patients. However, neither compliance to the lifestyle intervention program nor body weight loss differed between deprived patients with obesity and non-deprived ones. Deprivation should not be a limitation when enrolling patients with obesity in lifestyle intervention programs.
尽管已知贫困患者中肥胖症的患病率很高，但贫困与肥胖之间的联系以及贫困对生活方式干预计划计划的依从性和疗效的影响尚不清楚。
对波尔多大学医院糖尿病科的40名患者（23名女性，平均±标准差年龄：49±17岁）和营养科的140名患者（101名女性，年龄：50±15岁）进行了贫困评估。对87名肥胖患者在量身定制的多学科生活方式干预前后进行了评估。使用EPICES评分评估贫困程度。贫困定义为EPICES评分>30。
与非贫困肥胖患者相比，贫困肥胖患者的当前体重指数（43.8±8.4对40.9±5.5kg/m²，p=0.02）和最大体重指数（46.1±8.6对42.3±5.2kg/m²，p=0.002）显著更高。根据贫困程度，体重减轻百分比没有差异（4.74±0.75对4.65±1.04%，p=0.9）。根据对生活方式干预计划的依从性，EPICES评分没有差异（20.5±8.5对29.9±3.9对29.0±2.5，无随访对部分随访对完全随访，p=0.58）。
贫困肥胖患者的病情比非贫困患者更严重。然而，肥胖贫困患者和非贫困患者在生活方式干预计划的依从性和体重减轻方面均无差异。在将肥胖患者纳入生活方式干预计划时，贫困不应成为限制因素。
