Abstract

Sindrom metabolik (SM) adalah suatu kombinasi gangguan medis yang meningkatkan risiko diabetes tipe 2 dan penyakit kardiovaskuler. Salah satu kriteria sindrom metabolik adalah obesitas sentralis. Beberapa sumber mendefinisikan sindrom metabolik menggunakan ukuran lingkar pinggang yang berbeda yang belum tentu sesuai apabila diterapkan untuk populasi Indonesia. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mendapat nilai titik potong lingkar pinggang yang optimal sebagai salah satu kriteria SM yang sesuai dengan antropometri populasi Indonesia. Penelitian ini bersifat deskriptif menggunakan data sekunder yang berasal Riset Kesehatan Dasar (Riskesdas) Indonesia 2007. Sampel terdiri dari 13.262 orang berusia diatas 15 tahun pria dan wanita tidak hamil. Sebagai variabel dependen adalah S, dan variabel independen adalah ukuran lingkar pinggang. Analisis statistik yang digunakan adalah Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve dengan software analisis data. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa nilai titik potong optimal dari ukuran lingkar pinggang untuk mengidentifikasi subjek-subjek dengan faktor risiko multiple (ganda) dari SM di Indonesia adalah 85 cm untuk pria dan 83,5 cm untuk wanita. Disimpulkan bahwa penentuan kriteria ukuran lingkar pinggang sebagai salah satu komponen penentu SM harus disesuaikan untuk setiap komunitas.

Metabolic syndrome (MS) is a combination of several medical conditions which increase the risk of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. One of the criteria of MS is central obesity. There are some resources which provide the definition of MS that used difference waist circumference, which was not always necessarelly in accordance with the Indonesian population. The aimed of this study was to determine the optimal cut-off point of waist circumference as a component of MS which appropiate to the anthopometric of Indonesia population. This was a descriptive study, and used a secondary data from Riskesdas 2007. Sample was consisted of 13.262 men and non pregnant women, age over 15 years-old. MS was as dependent variable, and waist circumference was as independent variable. Statitical analysis was done by using software data analyzes with ROC curve methode. The result of study showed that optimal cut-off point of waist circumference to identify subjects with multiple risk of MS was 85 cm for Indonesian men and 83,5 for Indonesian women. It was concluded that the determination of the criteria of waist circumference as one of the criteria of SM should be adjusted for every community.

References

1. Ford ES, Giles WH, Dietz WH. Prevalence of the metabolic syndrome among US adults: findings from the third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. JAMA. 2002; 287: 356-9.

2. Pacini G. The hyperbolic equilibrium between insulin sensitivity and secretion. Nutrtion Metabolism and Cardiovascular Disease. 2006; 16: S22–7.

3. National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III) 2002. Third Report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III) final report. Circulation. 2002; 106: 3143–421.

4. Grundy SM, Cleeman JI, Daniels SR, Donato KA, Eckel RH. Diagnosis and management of the metabolik syndrome: an American Heart Association/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Scientific Statement. Circulation. 2005; 112: 2735–52

5. World Health Organization. Definition, diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus and its complications: report of a WHO Consultation. Part 1: diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus [monograph on the internet]. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 1999 [cited 2001 Nov 5]. Available from: http://whqlibdoc.who.int/- hq/1999/WHO_NCD_NCS_99.2.pdf.

6. Hills SA, Balkau B , Coppack SW , Dekker JM. The EGIR-RISC STUDY (The European Group for the study of insulin resistance: relationship between insulin sensitivity and cardiovascular disease risk): I. Methodology and Objectives. Diabetologia. 2004; 47 (3): 566-70.

7. International Diabetes Federation. The IDF consensus worldwide definition of the metabolic syndrome [manuscript on the internet]], 2006 [cited 2012 Oct 11]. Available from: http://www. idf.org/webdata/docs/ MetS_def_update2006.pdf.

8. Reaven GM, Einhorn D, Cobin RH, Ford E, Ganda OP, Handelsman Y, et al. American College of endocrinology position statement on the insulin resistance syndrome. Endocrine Practice. 2003; 9: 237–52.

9. Park MJ, Yun KE, Lee GE, Cho HJ, Park HS. A cross-sectional study of socioeconomic status and the metabolik syndrome in Korean adults. Annals of Epidemiology. 2007; 17 (4): 320-6.

10. Marquezine GF, Oliveira CM, Pereira AC, Krieger JE, Mill JG. Metabolik syndrome determinants in an urban population from Brazil: social class and gender-specific interaction. International Journal of Cardiology. 2008; 129: 259–65.

11. Tan CE, Ma S, Wai D, Chew SK, Tai ES. Can we apply the national cholesterol education program adult treatment panel definition of the metabolik syndrome to Asians? Diabetes Care. 2004; 27: 1182–6.

Download

Included in

Epidemiology Commons

Share

COinS