体脂肪率评估心血管危险因素研究  

Body Fat Percentage in the Evaluation of Risk Factors for Cardiovascular Risk Factors

作　　者：董剩勇[1] 王曼柳 孙晓楠[3] 冯大跃 曾强[3] 

机构地区：[1]中国人民解放军总参管理保障部保健处,北京市100034 [2]清华大学生物医学测试中心 [3]中国人民解放军总医院健康管理研究院

出　　处：《中国全科医学》2015年第36期4416-4421,共6页Chinese General Practice

基　　金：国家科技支撑计划课题(2012BAI37B04);全军"十一五"计划保健专项(10BJZ18)

摘　　要：目的探讨体质指数(BMI)和体脂肪率评估心血管危险因素(CVRFs)的差异,分析BMI和体脂肪率衡量肥胖程度发生矛盾时,哪个指标更能准确反映CVRFs风险。方法选择2013年2—9月在中国人民解放军总医院进行全面健康体检的人群共3 859例,进行横断面研究,测量身高、体质量,计算BMI,利用生物电阻抗法测定体脂肪率,常规方法测定血压、血糖和血脂水平。根据BMI和体脂肪率分为4组,第1组:BMI<25.0 kg/m^2,且体脂肪率<25.0%(男性)或体脂肪率<30.0%(女性);第2组:BMI<25.0 kg/m^2,且体脂肪率≥25.0%(男性)或体脂肪率≥30.0%(女性);第3组:BMI≥25.0 kg/m^2,且体脂肪率<25.0%(男性)或体脂肪率<30.0%(女性);第4组:BMI≥25.0 kg/m^2,且体脂肪率≥25.0%(男性)或体脂肪率≥30.0%(女性)。比较各组CVRFs情况的差异,采用偏相关分析、多因素Logistic回归分析CVRFs的影响因素。结果男性较女性身高、体质量、BMI、腰臀比、收缩压、舒张压、空腹血糖(FPG)、总胆固醇(TC)、三酰甘油(TG)、低密度脂蛋白胆固醇(LDL-C)水平升高,体脂肪率、高密度脂蛋白胆固醇(HDL-C)水平降低(P<0.05)。4组性别、年龄、身高、体质量、BMI、体脂肪率、腰臀比、收缩压、舒张压、FPG、TC、TG、HDL-C、LDL-C水平比较,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。控制性别、年龄、身高、体质量和腰臀比后,BMI与收缩压、舒张压均呈正相关(r=0.071、0.054,P<0.05),与HDL-C水平呈负相关(r=-0.063,P<0.05),与FPG、TC、TG、LDL-C水平无直线相关关系(r=0.020、-0.019、-0.021、0.016,P>0.05);体脂肪率与FPG、TC、TG、LDL-C水平均呈正相关(r=0.038、0.078、0.051、0.079,P<0.05),与HDL-C水平呈负相关(r=-0.050,P<0.05),与收缩压、舒张压无直线相关关系(r=-0.006、0.008,P>0.05)。男性较女性高血压、糖尿病、血脂异常、两项及以上CVRFs发生率升高(P<0.05)。4组高血压、糖尿病、血脂异常、两项及以上CVRFs发生率比较,差异有统�Objective To study the difference between BMI and body fat percentage in the evaluation of cardiovascular risk factors （CVRFs） and analyze which indicator can more accurately reflect CVRFs when the two indicators contradict each other in obese degree evaluation. Methods A total of 3 859 people who received comprehensive physical examination in Chinese PLA General Hospital from February to September in 2013 were enrolled in the study. Cross - sectional analysis was conducted. Height and body mass were measured, and BMI was calculated. Body fat percentage was measured using bioelectrical impedance technique. Blood pressure, blood glucose and blood lipid level were measured using conventional method. According to BMI and body fat percentage, the subjects were divided into 4 groups： group 1 （ BMI 〈 25.0 kg/m2 , males with body fat percentage 〈 25.0% or females with body fat percentage 〈 30. 0% ） , group 2 （ BMI 〈 25.0 kg/m2 , males with body fat percentages〉 25.0% or females with body fat percentage 〉t 30. 0% ） ; group 3 （ BMI ≥ 25.0 kg/m2 , males with body fatpercentage 〈 25.0% or females with body fat percentage 〈 30. 0% ） and group 4 （BMI≥ 25.0 kg/m2, males with body fat percentage ≥ 25.0% or females with body fat percentage ≥30.0% ） . Comparison was made in CVRFs between the 4 groups. Partial correlation analysis and multivariate Logistic regression analysis were undertaken on the influencing factors for CVRFs. Results Compared with females, males were higher （P 〈 0. 05） in height, body weight, BMI, waist - hip ratio, systolic pressure, diastolic pressure, FPG, TC, TG, LDL - C and were lower （ P 〈 0. 05 ） in body fat percentage and HDL-C. The 4 groups were significantly different （P 〈 0. 05 ） in gender, age, height, body mass, BMI, body fat percentage, waist - hip line, systolic pressure, diastolic presstlre, PFG, TC, TG, HDL - C and LDL - C. With the control of gender, age, height, body mass and waist- hip ratio, BMI was positively correlated （r =

关 键 词：体脂肪率 人体质量指数 肥胖症 危险因素 

分 类 号：R589.25[医药卫生—内分泌]