Table 2.
Baseline and follow-up anthropometric values in participants who developed hyperglycaemic disorders
| NGT (n=972) |
Isolated IFG (n=159) |
Isolated IGT (n=342) |
IFG+IGT (n=152) |
NDDM (n=260) |
Overall p values |
|
| At follow-up survey | ||||||
| WHtR (cm/cm) | 0.51 (0.47–0.55)*†‡ | 0.52 (0.48– 0.56)†‡ |
0.53 (0.49–0.57)†‡§ | 0.54 (0.51–0.59)*§¶ | 0.56 (0.52–0.60)*§¶ | 0.000 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 23.46 (21.77–25.53)*†‡¶ | 24.27 (22.49– 26.17)‡§ |
24.44 (22.63–26.50)‡§ | 25.09 (23.62–27.01)§ | 25.73 (23.29–27.82)*§¶ | 0.000 |
| WC (cm) | 80.65 (74.00–87.00)*†‡¶ | 82.80 (77.00– 91.00)†‡§ |
84.00 (78.00–90.00)†‡§ | 86.70 (80.28–93.00)*§¶ | 88.00 (82.00–95.00)*§¶ | 0.000 |
| WHR (cm/cm) | 0.86 (0.81–0.91)*†‡¶ | 0.88 (0.84– 0.92)‡§ |
0.88 (0.83–0.92)‡§ | 0.90 (0.86–0.94)§ | 0.91 (0.87–0.95)*§¶ | 0.000 |
| At baseline survey | ||||||
| WHtR (cm/cm) | 0.50±0.05*†¶ | 0.52±0.06†‡§ | 0.53±0.05‡¶ | 0.54±0.05§¶ | 0.55±0.06*§¶ | 0.000 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 23.03 (21.23–25.16)*†‡ | 23.31 (21.56– 25.64)‡ |
24.03 (22.10–26.22)§ | 24.98 (23.47–26.67)§ | 25.42 (23.17–27.22)§¶ | 0.000 |
| WC (cm) | 79.00 (73.00–86.00) | 82.00 (76.00– 89.00) |
83.00 (77.10–89.00) | 87.00 (81.00–91.28) | 86.00 (80.00–93.00) | 0.282 |
| WHR (cm/cm) | 0.86 (0.81–0.90)‡ | 0.87 (0.92–0.92) | 0.87 (0.82–0.91) | 0.89 (0.86–0.93) | 0.90 (0.86–0.94)§ | 0.010 |
Data are expressed as median (IQR) or mean±SD.
At follow-up survey: one-way ANOVA was used for WHtR, BMI and WC among the five glucose metabolic groups. LSD analysis was applied for the further comparisons between any two subgroups (a’=0.005). Kruskal-Wallis H analysis was applied for WHR among the five groups and Mann-Whitney U analysis was performed for the following comparisons within any two subgroups (a’=0.005).
At baseline survey: one-way ANOVA was used for all indices among the five glucose metabolic groups. LSD analysis was applied for WHtR, BMI and WHR between any two subgroups’ comparison (a’=0.005).
*Versus isolated IGT and p<0.005.
†Versus IFG+IGT and p<0.005.
‡Versus NDDM and p<0.005.
§Versus NGT and p<0.005.
¶Versus isolated IFG and p<0.005.
ANOVA, analysis of variance; BMI, body mass index; IFG, impaired fasting glucose; IGT, impaired glucose tolerance; NDDM, newly diagnosed diabetes mellitus; NGT, normal glucose tolerance; WC, waist circumference; WHR, waist-to-hip ratio; WHtR, waist-to-height ratio.