Burden of type 2 diabetes mellitus and its risk factors in North Africa and the Middle East, 1990-2019: findings from the Global Burden of Disease study 2019.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) in the North Africa and Middle East region is alarmingly high, prompting us to investigate the burden and factors contributing to it through the GBD study. Additionally, there is a lack of knowledge about the epidemiological status of T2DM in this region, so our aim is to provide a comprehensive overview of the burden of T2DM and its associated risk factors. METHODS: Using data from the 2019 Global Burden of Disease Study, we calculated the attributable burden of T2DM for each of the 21 countries in the region for the years 1990 and 2019. This included prevalence, mortality, disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), and risk factors. RESULTS: Between 1990 and 2019, there was a significant increase in the age-standardized incidence (79.6%; 95% Uncertainty Interval: 75.0 to 84.5) and prevalence (85.5%; [80.8 to 90.3]) rates of T2DM per 100,000 populations. The age-standardized mortality rate (1.7%; [-10.4 to 14.9]), DALYs (31.2%; [18.3 to 42.2]), and years lived with disability (YLDs) (82.6%; [77.2 to 88.1]) also increased during this period. Modifiable risk factors, such as high body mass index (56.4%; [42.8 to 69.8]), low physical activity (15.5%; [9.0 to 22.8]), and ambient particulate matter pollution (20.9%; [15.2 to 26.2]), were the main contributors to the number of deaths. CONCLUSION: The burden of T2DM, in terms of mortality, DALYs, and YLDs, continues to rise in the region. The incidence rate of T2DM has increased in many areas. The burden of T2DM attributed to modifiable risk factors continues to grow in most countries. Targeting these modifiable risk factors could effectively reduce the growth and disease burden of T2DM in the region.

Burden of type 1 diabetes mellitus in the North Africa and Middle East Region, 1990-2019; findings from the global burden of disease study.

AIMS: We aimed to report the burden of type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) in the North Africa and Middle East region and its 21 countries from 1990 to 2019. METHODS: Information related to incidence, prevalence, mortality, disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), and years lived with disability (YLDs) of T1DM was acquired from the 2019 Global Burden of Disease study. The burden was estimated by sex, age groups, and socio-demographic index (SDI) in 21 countries. RESULTS: Over the past 30 years, regional incidence, prevalence, mortality, and DALYs of T1DM increase by 188.7%, 304.8%, 43.7%, and 71.6%, respectively. While the age-standardized incidence and prevalence rates increased by 84% and 91%, the mortality and DALYs rates decreased by 34% and 13%. During these years, the contribution of YLDs to total DALYs increased considerably (from 17% to 42%). The highest increase in the incidence and prevalence rates occurred in high SDI countries. Moreover, the Mortality to Incidence Ratio (MIR) decreased in the region countries. CONCLUSIONS: Despite progress made in diabetes care, there is a persistently increasing burden of T1DM in the region countries. This indicates that T1DM is still one of the major health challenges in the region countries, especially in high SDI Arab countries.

Accuracy of the Common Predictive Equations for Estimating Resting Energy Expenditure among Normal and Overweight Girl University Students.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to determine the accuracy of commonly used predictive formulas of resting metabolic rate (RMR) compared to measured RMR in normal and overweight young females. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 98 female university students aged 18-30 years with body mass index 18 to 30 kg/m(2) were recruited. Anthropometric indices and body compositions were measured. RMR was measured by indirect calorimetry (FitMate, Cosmed, Rome, Italy) and estimated by 11 predictive formulas. The accuracy of the RMR formulas and mean percentage differences between estimated and measured values were calculated. Paired t test was used to compare estimated and measured RMRs. RESULT: There were no significant differences between measured and estimated RMR by the 4 commonly used formulas (Mifflin, Cunningham, and World Health Organization [WHO]/Food and Agriculture Organization [FAO]). Among all of the equations, the Mifflin formula showed the lowest bias (-2.97 ± 116.43 kcal/day) at the group level and was the most accurate formula (80.23%) in normal and overweight participants. The over- and underestimated values were about 14% and 5.5%, respectively. In normal and overweight females, Mifflin was the most accurate formula, with 75.51% and 84.61% accuracy, respectively. CONCLUSION: Given the current lack of a standardized formula that consistently delivers accurate results, the Mifflin formula can be recommended for estimating energy requirements in normal and overweight females in clinical practice.