Dataset Information

Adherence to the Dutch healthy diet index and change in glycemic control and cardiometabolic markers in people with type 2 diabetes.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

To investigate whether adherence to the Dutch Healthy Diet index 2015 (DHD15-index) is associated with change in glycemic control and cardio-metabolic markers over two-year follow-up in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

Methods

This prospective cohort study included 1202 individuals with T2D (mean age 68.7 ± 9.0 years; 62.5% male; mean HbA1c 53.8 ± 11.7 mmol/mol) from the Diabetes Care System cohort. Baseline dietary intake was assessed using a validated food frequency questionnaire, and adherence to the DHD15-index was estimated (range 0-130). HbA1c, fasting glucose, blood lipids (HDL and LDL cholesterol, cholesterol ratio), blood pressure, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and BMI were measured at baseline, and after one- and two-year follow-up. Linear mixed model analyses were conducted to examine the associations between adherence to the DHD15-index and glycemic control and the cardio-metabolic outcomes, adjusting for energy intake, sociodemographic and lifestyle characteristics, and medication.

Results

Highest adherence (T3) to the DHD15-index was not associated with change in HbA1c, compared to lowest adherence (T1) [β_T3vsT1: 0.62 mmol/mol (- 0.94; 2.19), P_trend = 0.44]. There was a non-linear association with fasting glucose, where moderate adherence (T2) was associated with a decrease in fasting glucose [β_T2vsT1: - 0.29 mmol/L (- 0.55; - 0.03), P_trend = 0.30]. Higher adherence to the DHD15-index was associated with a decrease in BMI [β_10point: - 0.41 kg/m² (- 0.60; - 0.21), P_trend < 0.001], but not with blood lipids, blood pressure or kidney function.

Conclusion

In this well-controlled population of people with T2D, adherence to the DHD15-index was associated with a decrease in BMI, but not with change in glycemic control or other cardio-metabolic parameters.

SUBMITTER: Bartels ECM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9279194 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Low glycemic index (LGI) diet has shown to be effective in reducing maternal and neonatal complications in high-risk pregnancies. OBJECTIVE:This trial aimed to examine the effectiveness of individualized LGI diet consultations based on the accurate diet glycemic load (GL) assessment tool on maternal and neonatal insulin resistance levels and diet behavior changes in overweight and obese pregnant women. METHODS:Overweight and obese pregnant women were recruited before 16 weeks of gestation and randomized to the LGI diet arm or the control arm. All participants received standard dietary education according to the Chinese Dietary Guide for Pregnant Women. In the intervention arm, additional individualized dietary GL assessments were performed using an app and instructions of lowering diet glycemic index (GI) to achieve LGI diet were provided by a clinical dietitian at early, middle, and late gestation. Primary outcomes were serum insulin at late gestation, incidence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) for mothers, and cord blood C-peptide level of neonates. RESULTS:In total, 400 subjects were randomized and received different interventions. There were no significant differences in maternal serum insulin levels (13.2 [9.3-13.2] uU/mL vs 12.4 [10.5-12.4] uU/mL), incidence of GDM (45 [22.5%] vs 43 [21.5%]), or cord blood C-peptide levels (mean 0.9ng/mL [SD 0.7] vs mean 0.8ng/mL [SD 0.6]) in the intervention group compared with the controls. The diet GI at late gestation was similar (mean 63.2 [SD 10.4] vs mean 64.3 [SD 10.4]), whereas greater diet fiber intake was observed in the intervention group (mean 11.6 grams [SD 8.0] vs mean 9.0 grams [SD 5.6]; P=.006). Adherence measurements did not significantly differ between 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS:Individualized LGI diet consultations for overweight and obese pregnant women failed to make a significant difference in maternal or neonatal insulin resistance compared with the standard gestational diet consultation. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01628835; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01628835 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/77LHgWP0k).