Association of Wrist Circumference and Waist-to-Height Ratio with Cardiometabolic Risk Factors among Type II Diabetics in a Ghanaian Population

Abstract

The study determined the association of wrist circumference (WrC) and waist-to-height ratio (WHtR) with cardiometabolic risk factors among diabetics in a Ghanaian population. This cross-sectional study involved 384 diabetic patients at Begoro District Hospital, Ghana. Blood pressure, anthropometrics, and biochemical indices were measured. The overall prevalence of dyslipidaemia, metabolic syndrome (MetS), and hypertension was 42.4%, 76.3%, and 39.8%, respectively. The optimum cut-off range of WrC to identify individuals at increased cardiometabolic risk was 17.5 to –17.8 cm for men and 16.0 to 16.7 cm for women while that of WHtR was 0.52 to 0.61 for men and 0.53 to 0.59 for women. WrC for women was a significant independent predictor for MetS [aOR = 3.0 (1.39–6.72), p = 0.005] and systolic blood pressure [aOR = 2.08 (1.17–3.68), p = 0.012]. WHtR was a significant positive predictor for triglycerides [aOR = 3.23 (0.10–3.82), p = 0.001] for women. Using Framingham risk scores, 61% of the subjects had elevated 10-year risk of developing cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), with no significant difference in gender prevalence. WrC [aOR = 6.13 (0.34–111.4), p = 0.107] and WHtR [aOR = 2.52 (0.42–15.02), p = 0.309] were associated with statistically insignificant increased odds of moderate-to-high risk of developing CVDs in 10 years. The use of gender-specific cut-offs for WrC and WHtR may offer putative markers for early identification of CRFs.

The association of wrist circumference with hypertension in northeastern Chinese residents in comparison with other anthropometric obesity indices

“…Therefore, hyperinsulinemia was considered to be correlated with the bone growth (Ferron et al, 2010), and WrC as a good surrogate assessing the cross-sectional area of bone then could be used to estimate the risks of insulin resistance, which was closely correlated with elevated BP. Meanwhile, some studies reported that individuals who are obese or overweight showed greater bone mass (Leonard et al, 2004; Clark, Ness & Tobias, 2006), which additionally implied that as a good measure of body frame and regional fat distribution (Obirikorang, Obirikorang & Acheampong, 2018; Mueller et al, 2013; Komurcu, Kilic & Anlar, 2014; Zampetti et al, 2018a), WrC could be used as an obesity index. Based on above knowledge and the strong positive association of obesity with CVD risk, several studies focusing on the associations of WrC with elevated BP as well as other metabolic abnormalities emerged (Kelishadi et al, 2017; Namazi et al, 2018a; Jahangiri Noudeh et al, 2013; Mohebi et al, 2014), while no finding from Chinese populations was published.…”

“…In addition to above generally used indices, wrist circumference (WrC) emerged as a novel anthropometric index in recent years, which is an easily obtained measure in estimating the body frame and regional fat distribution (Obirikorang, Obirikorang & Acheampong, 2018; Mueller et al, 2013; Komurcu, Kilic & Anlar, 2014; Zampetti et al, 2018a). Published findings showed that WrC was positively associated with several CVD risk factors, especially among adolescent populations (Zampetti et al, 2018b; Kajale et al, 2014; Kelishadi et al, 2017), while findings from adults are inconsistent (Hajsadeghi et al, 2016; Watkins et al, 2015; Kalantari & Khalili, 2017; Derakhshan et al, 2016).…”

Correlation of wrist circumference with waist circumference and body mass index in adults with early-onset type 2 diabetes mellitus

“…20 In another study from Ghana, the optimal cut-off value of WrC to identify individuals at increased cardio metabolic risk was between 17.5 and 17.8 cm for men and 16.0 and 16.7 cm for women. 21 A study from Nepal also showed positive Pearson correlation of wrist circumference with waist circumference(r=0.58 in male and 0.64 in female) and with weight (r=0.64 in male and 0.86 in female). 22 In CASPIAN-IV study wrist circumference performed relatively well in classifying individuals into overweight (AUC: 0.67-0.75, p<0.001), generalized obesity (AUC: 0.81-0.85, p<0.001) and abdominal obesity (AUC: 0.82-0.87, p<0.001).…”

Sensitivitas dan spesifisitas lingkar pergelangan tangan sebagai prediktor obesitas dan resistensi insulin pada remaja akhir

“…Obesitas dan overweight berkaitan dengan peningkatan risiko kardiometabolik. 14 Perkembangan pubertas dan hormon seksual berpengaruh terhadap komposisi tubuh. Selama masa pubertas laki-laki memiliki massa tubuh bebas lemak dan massa tulang yang lebih besar dibanding perempuan.…”