Medicine (Western Health) - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5
-
ItemPrevalence of Obesity and the Relationship between the Body Mass Index and Body Fat: Cross-Sectional, Population-Based Data(PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE, 2012-01-13)BACKGROUND: Anthropometric measures such as the body mass index (BMI) and waist circumference are widely used as convenient indices of adiposity, yet there are limitations in their estimates of body fat. We aimed to determine the prevalence of obesity using criteria based on the BMI and waist circumference, and to examine the relationship between the BMI and body fat. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: This population-based, cross-sectional study was conducted as part of the Geelong Osteoporosis Study. A random sample of 1,467 men and 1,076 women aged 20-96 years was assessed 2001-2008. Overweight and obesity were identified according to BMI (overweight 25.0-29.9 kg/m²; obesity ≥30.0 kg/m²) and waist circumference (overweight men 94.0-101.9 cm; women 80.0-87.9 cm; obesity men ≥102.0 cm, women ≥88.0 cm); body fat mass was assessed using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry; height and weight were measured and lifestyle factors documented by self-report. According to the BMI, 45.1% (95%CI 42.4-47.9) of men and 30.2% (95%CI 27.4-33.0) of women were overweight and a further 20.2% (95%CI 18.0-22.4) of men and 28.6% (95%CI 25.8-31.3) of women were obese. Using waist circumference, 27.5% (95%CI 25.1-30.0) of men and 23.3% (95%CI 20.8-25.9) of women were overweight, and 29.3% (95%CI 26.9-31.7) of men and 44.1% (95%CI 41.2-47.1) of women, obese. Both criteria indicate that approximately 60% of the population exceeded recommended thresholds for healthy body habitus. There was no consistent pattern apparent between BMI and energy intake. Compared with women, BMI overestimated adiposity in men, whose excess weight was largely attributable to muscular body builds and greater bone mass. BMI also underestimated adiposity in the elderly. Regression models including gender, age and BMI explained 0.825 of the variance in percent body fat. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: As the BMI does not account for differences in body composition, we suggest that gender- and age-specific thresholds should be considered when the BMI is used to indicate adiposity.
-
ItemDoes an increase in body mass index over 10 years affect knee structure in a population-based cohort study of adult women?(BMC, 2010)INTRODUCTION: Although obesity is a modifiable risk factor for knee osteoarthritis (OA), the effect of weight gain on knee structure in young and healthy adults has not been examined. The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between body mass index (BMI), and change in BMI over the preceding 10-year period, and knee structure (cartilage defects, cartilage volume and bone marrow lesions (BMLs)) in a population-based sample of young to middle-aged females. METHODS: One hundred and forty-two healthy, asymptomatic females (range 30 to 49 years) in the Barwon region of Australia, underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) during 2006 to 2008. BMI measured 10 years prior (1994 to 1997), current BMI and change in BMI (accounting for baseline BMI) over this period, was assessed for an association with cartilage defects and volume, and BMLs. RESULTS: After adjusting for age and tibial plateau area, the risk of BMLs was associated with every increase in one-unit of baseline BMI (OR 1.14 (95% CI 1.03 to 1.26) P = 0.009), current BMI (OR 1.13 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.23) P = 0.005), and per one unit increase in BMI (OR 1.14 (95% CI 1.03 to 1.26) P = 0.01). There was a trend for a one-unit increase in current BMI to be associated with increased risk of cartilage defects (OR 1.06 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.13) P = 0.05), and a suggestion that a one-unit increase in BMI over 10 years may be associated with reduced cartilage volume (-17.8 ml (95% CI -39.4 to 3.9] P = 0.10). Results remained similar after excluding those with osteophytes. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides longitudinal evidence for the importance of avoiding weight gain in women during early to middle adulthood as this is associated with increased risk of BMLs, and trend toward increased tibiofemoral cartilage defects. These changes have been shown to precede increased cartilage loss. Longitudinal studies will show whether avoiding weight gain in early adulthood may play an important role in diminishing the risk of knee OA.
-
ItemCalcaneal ultrasound reference ranges for Australian men and women: the Geelong Osteoporosis Study(SPRINGER LONDON LTD, 2013-04)UNLABELLED: Heel ultrasound is a more portable modality for assessing fracture risk than dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and does not use ionising radiation. Fracture risk assessment requires appropriate reference data to enable comparisons. This study reports the first heel ultrasound reference ranges for the Australian population. INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to develop calcaneal (heel) ultrasound reference ranges for the Australian adult population using a population-based random sample. METHODS: Men and women aged≥20 years were randomly selected from the Barwon Statistical Division in 2001-2006 and 1993-1997, respectively, using the electoral roll. Broadband ultrasound attenuation (BUA), speed of sound (SOS) and stiffness index (SI) were measured at the heel using a Lunar Achilles Ultrasonometer. Gender-specific means and standard deviations for BUA, SOS and SI were calculated for the entire sample (men 20-93 years, n=1,104; women 20-92 years, n=914) and for participants aged 20-29 years (men, n=157; women, n=151). Associations between ultrasound measures and age were examined using linear regression. RESULTS: For men, mean±standard deviation BUA, SOS and SI were 118.7±15.8 dB/MHz, 1,577.0±43.7 m/s and 100.5±20.7, respectively; values for women were consistently lower (111.0±16.4 dB/MHz, P<0.001; 1,571.0±39.0 m/s, P=0.001; and 93.7±20.3, P<0.001, respectively). BUA was higher in young men compared with young women (124.5±14.4 vs 121.0±15.1 dB/MHz), but SOS (1,590.1±43.1 vs 1,592.5±35.0 m/s) and SI (108.0±19.9 vs 106.3±17.7) were not. The relationships between age and each ultrasound measure were linear and negative across the age range in men; associations were also negative in women but non-linear. CONCLUSION: These data provide reference standards to facilitate the assessment of fracture risk in an Australian population using heel ultrasound.
-
ItemTotal and Appendicular Lean Mass Reference Ranges for Australian Men and Women: The Geelong Osteoporosis Study(SPRINGER, 2014-04)The aim of this study was to develop reference ranges for total and appendicular lean mass measured using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) from a randomly selected population-based sample of men and women residing in southeastern Australia. Men (n = 1,411) and women (n = 960) aged 20-93 years, enrolled in the Geelong Osteoporosis Study, were randomly selected from the Barwon Statistical Division using the electoral roll as a sampling frame in 2001-2006 (67 % participation) and 1993-1997 (77 % participation), respectively. Using DXA (Lunar DPX-L or Prodigy Pro) at baseline for men and at the 10-year follow-up for women (2004-2008), total and appendicular lean mass were measured. Means and standard deviations for each lean mass measure (absolute and relative to height squared) were generated for each age decade, and cutpoints equivalent to T scores of -2.0 and -1.0 were calculated using data from young adult men and women aged 20-39 years. Young adult reference data were derived from 374 men and 308 women. Cutpoints for relative appendicular lean mass equal to T scores of -2.0 and -1.0 were 6.94 and 7.87 kg/m(2) for men and 5.30 and 6.07 kg/m(2) for women. The proportions of men and women aged ≥80 years with a T score less than -2.0 were 16.0 and 6.2 %, respectively. These reference ranges may be useful for identifying lean mass deficits in the assessment of muscle wasting and sarcopenia.
-
ItemFracture risk among older men: osteopenia and osteoporosis defined using cut-points derived from female versus male reference data(SPRINGER LONDON LTD, 2014-03)SUMMARY: We explored the effect of using male and female reference data in a male sample to categorise areal bone mineral density (BMD). Using male reference data, a large proportion of fractures arose from osteopenia, whereas using female reference data shifted the fracture burden into normal BMD. INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to describe fracture risk associated with osteopenia and osteoporosis in older men, defined by areal BMD and using cut-points derived from male and female reference data. METHODS: As part of the Geelong Osteoporosis Study, we followed 619 men aged 60-93 years after BMD assessments (performed 2001-2006) until 2010, fracture, death or emigration. Post-baseline fractures were radiologically confirmed, and proportions of fractures in each BMD category were age-standardised to national profiles. RESULTS: Based on World Health Organization criteria, and using male reference data, 207 men had normal BMD at the femoral neck, 357 were osteopenic and 55 were osteoporotic. Using female reference data, corresponding numbers were 361, 227 and 31. During the study, 130 men died, 15 emigrated and 63 sustained at least one fracture. Using male reference data, most (86.5 %) of the fractures occurred in men without osteoporosis on BMD criteria (18.4 % normal BMD, 68.1 % osteopenia). The pattern differed when female reference data were used; while most fractures arose from men without osteoporosis (88.2 %), the burden shifted from those with osteopenia (34.8 %) to those with normal BMD (53.4 %). CONCLUSIONS: Decreasing BMD categories defined increasing risk of fracture. Although men with osteoporotic BMD were at greatest risk, they made a relatively small contribution to the total burden of fractures. Using male reference data, two-thirds of the fractures arose from men with osteopenia. However, using female reference data, approximately half of the fractures arose from those with normal BMD. Using female reference data to define osteoporosis in men does not appear to be the optimal approach.