The Effect of Different Interventions for Lifestyle Modifications on the Number of Diagnostic Criteria and Clinical Aspects of Metabolic Syndrome.

School of Health and Life Sciences, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil. Department of Physiotherapy, Federal University of Health Sciences of Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, Brazil. Cardiology Service of Hospital São Lucas, Faculty of Medicine, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil. Department of Contextual Behavioral Therapies, Center for Family and Individual Studies, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. Biomedical Gerontology Graduate Program - Study Group on Cardiometabolic Risk, Aging and Nutrition - Institute of Geriatrics and Gerontology, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre RS, Brazil.

Metabolic syndrome and related disorders. 2021;(1):8-17
Full text from:

Abstract

Background: Lifestyle intervention programs comprise the first-choice therapy to reduce the cardiovascular risk factors in metabolic syndrome (MetS). Our aim was to compare the effects of three lifestyle modification programs on the number of diagnostic criteria and clinical parameters of MetS. Methods: Twelve-week clinical trial, including 125 adults who presented at least three of the criteria defined by the revised NCEP ATP III (National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Panel III) for MetS. Individuals were randomized into three multidisciplinary intervention groups: Standard Intervention (SI), Group Intervention (GI) and Individual Intervention (II). Results: Seventy-one individuals, aged 34-59 years, concluded the study: SI: 20, GI: 25, and II: 26. The GI and II groups presented a significant decrease of body mass index, abdominal circumference, diastolic and systolic arterial pressure after intervention. The number of diagnostic criteria for MetS decreased significantly. Within the GI and II groups, 16.0% and 15.4% of the individuals, respectively, did not meet the criteria for the clinical condition studied at the end of the interventions. In the II group, the percentage of individuals with five criteria reduced 83.5%. In the GI group, the percentage of individuals with five criteria remained the same, but the number of individuals with four criteria presented a 50.0% reduction. Conclusions: Results reinforce that nonpharmacological strategies for changing lifestyle affect the reduction of cardiovascular risk factors existing in MetS. They are also able to remove the population from this clinical condition by decreasing the diagnostic criteria. II or GI lead to a successful treatment of MetS, especially when conducted by multidisciplinary team. Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials-ReBEC number: RBR-9wz5fc.

Methodological quality

Metadata