Waist Hip Ratio

Introduction: Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in global deaths and accounts for 17 million people worldwide. Despite the favorable changes in the risk factors, new risk factors have emerged. These include abdominal obesity and physical inactivity, both of which are considered independent and mediating factors in the development of cardiovascular disease. They are also associated with type 2 Diabetes and Metabolic syndrome, growing health hazards all over the world and the major risk factors for cardiovascular disease. Aim of The Study: To determine the associations of Waist circumference and Waist Hip ratio with the risk of incident cardiovascular events and to determine the strength of association of waist and waist hip

These patients were subjected to anthropometric measurements namely waist hip ratio, weight height, skin fold thickness and Lipid profile was done. Results: Both the groups were matched for age, sex and risk factors other than the one studied, namely smoking, alcoholism, diabetes, hypertension, family H/o. There is no statistical difference is noted between the two groups in age, sex, smoking, alcoholism, Hypertension, Diabetes, Family H/o. In all these parameters compared between these groups the P value is more than 0.05 which is statistically insignificant. Conclusion: BMI does not properly define obesity and the risk of cardiovascular events. BMI can be normal in a patient with cardiovascular disease. Abdominal obesity is an independent risk factor for coronary heart disease. Waist hip ratio and waist circumference are better indicators of the cardiovascular risk in a given individual than

SKIN FOLD THICKNESS: All the skin folds were taken with Vernier calipers. The measurements are taken on the right side of the body. The fold of skinand underlying subcutaneous adipose tissue were gently grasped between the left thumb and forefingers.Enough skin and adipose tissue was grasped to form a distinct fold that separates from the underlying muscle. The skinfold was grasped 2.0 cm above the place, the measurement taken .The jaws of the calipers were placed at the marked level, perpendicular to the length of the fold, and the skinfold thickness was measured to the nearest 0.1 mm while the fingers continue to hold the skinfold. Skin fold measurements were taken at 6 sites namely Triceps, Biceps, Thigh, Subscapular, Suprailiac and Abdomen. The measurements were divided into two groups Central fat Mass (CFM) and Peripheral fat mass (PFM). For the assessment of CFM the sum of Abdominal, Suprailiac and Subscapular were used and for the assessment of PFM the sum of Triceps, Biceps and Thigh were used. The ratio of CFM to PFM was analyzed in both control and study group, sex wise (European Journal of Endocrinology, Volume 156, Issue 6, 655-661).