Graybeal Austin J, Brandner Caleb F, Compton Abby T, Swafford Sydney H, Aultman Ryan S, Vallecillo-Bustos Anabelle, Stavres Jon
School of Kinesiology and Nutrition, University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg, MS, USA.
School of Kinesiology and Nutrition, University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg, MS, USA.
Clin Nutr ESPEN. 2024 Dec;64:390-399. doi: 10.1016/j.clnesp.2024.10.158. Epub 2024 Oct 30.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Given the technological advances in 3D smartphone (SP) anthropometry, this technique presents a unique opportunity to improve metabolic syndrome (MetS) screening through optimal waist circumference (WC) landmarking procedures. Thus, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the associations between individual MetS risk factors and nine independent WC sites collected using tape measurement or SP anthropometrics and to determine the differences in MetS severity and prevalence when using these different WC measurement locations.
A total of 130 participants (F:74, M:56; age: 27.8 ± 11.1) completed this cross-sectional evaluation. Using traditional tape measurement, WC was measured at the lowest rib (WC), superior iliac crest (WC), and between the WC and WC (WC). Additionally, WC measurements were automated using a SP application at six sites along the torso. MetS risk factors were used to calculate MetS severity (MetS) and prevalence. Associations were evaluated using multiple linear regression, the effect of each WC site on MetS was analyzed using mixed-models ANCOVA, and differences in MetS prevalence using WC as the current standard were determined using sensitivity, specificity, chi-squared tests, and odds ratios.
The reference SP-WC (SP) and WC demonstrated the largest associations (all p < 0.001) with HDL cholesterol (SP: -0.48; WC: -0.49), systolic (SP: 0.32; WC: 0.30) and diastolic blood pressure (SP: 0.34; WC: 0.32), and fasting blood glucose (SP: 0.38; WC: 0.37). SP and WC were the only WC without significantly different MetS; yet demonstrated lower MetS and sensitivity (SP: 77.8 %; WC: 74.1 %) relative to WC, the conventional (or standard) WC measure.
Compared to the current standard, SP and WC protocols are more highly associated with individual MetS risk factors and produce different MetS and diagnoses; highlighting the need for new MetS WC protocols. Given the surge in remote/mobile healthcare, SP may be an alternative to traditional methods in this context but requires further investigation before implementation.
鉴于3D智能手机人体测量技术的进步，该技术为通过优化腰围（WC）标记程序来改善代谢综合征（MetS）筛查提供了独特的机会。因此，本研究的目的是评估个体MetS风险因素与使用卷尺测量或智能手机人体测量学收集的九个独立WC部位之间的关联，并确定使用这些不同WC测量位置时MetS严重程度和患病率的差异。
共有130名参与者（女性74名，男性56名；年龄：27.8±11.1岁）完成了这项横断面评估。使用传统卷尺测量，在最低肋骨处（WC）、髂嵴上方（WC）以及WC与WC之间（WC）测量WC。此外，使用智能手机应用程序在沿躯干的六个部位自动测量WC。使用MetS风险因素来计算MetS严重程度（MetS）和患病率。使用多元线性回归评估关联，使用混合模型协方差分析分析每个WC部位对MetS的影响，并使用敏感性、特异性、卡方检验和比值比确定以WC作为当前标准时MetS患病率的差异。
参考智能手机腰围（SP）和WC与高密度脂蛋白胆固醇（SP：-0.48；WC：-0.49）、收缩压（SP：0.32；WC：0.30）和舒张压（SP：0.34；WC：0.32）以及空腹血糖（SP：0.38；WC：0.37）的关联最大（所有p<0.001）。SP和WC是唯一MetS无显著差异的WC；但相对于传统（或标准）WC测量方法WC，其MetS和敏感性较低（SP：77.8%；WC：74.1%）。
与当前标准相比，SP和WC方案与个体MetS风险因素的关联更强，且产生不同的MetS和诊断结果；突出了新的MetS WC方案的必要性。鉴于远程/移动医疗保健的兴起，在这种情况下，智能手机测量可能是传统方法的一种替代方案，但在实施前需要进一步研究。
