IDF21-0682 Wrist circumference as a marker for abdominal obesity correlates with waist circumference, independent of diabetes

Abstract

Background: Contemporary literature highlights the importance of wrist circumference as an easy-to-use marker of general and abdominal obesity. Aim: To examine whether Wrist Circumference (WrC) correlates with Waist Circumference (WC) and BMI among diabetics and non-diabetics. Method: We measured WrC and WC in a heavy volume outpatient department of a specialised endocrine centre with and without diabetes over three months (July–September 2021). Patients with known medical conditions, that were confounding and influencing anthropometric parameters like body weight and BMI, including thyroid related disorders, genetic disorders were excluded. A dedicated nurse assistant was trained to eliminate observer bias. The measurements were by standard protocols using calibrated instruments. Unpaired t test, Fisher's exact test and Pearson r were used for statistical analysis. Results: We evaluated overall 1089 individuals (264 males, 825 females), which comprised diabetics (T2DM) n = 551, and Non-Diabetics (ND) n = 538. Mean age (years) in overall cohort (n = 1089) was 46 (±16, 95% CI 45–47), in T2DM (50.8 ± 12.7, 95% CI 49.8–51.9) which was more than ND (41 ± 16.6, 95% CI 39.6–42.4), p < 0.0001. Mean body weight (kg) in overall cohort was 72 (±15, 95% CI 71–73); in T2DM (72.7 ± 14.1, 95% CI 71.5–73.9) it was more than ND (70.5 ± 15.4, 95% CI 69.2–71.9), p = 0.016. Mean BMI (kg/m2) in overall cohort was 28 (±5.3, 95% CI 28–29); in T2DM (28.3 ± 4.9, 95% CI 27.8–28.7) which was comparable with ND (28.3 ± 5.5, 95% CI 27.8–28.7), p = 0.95 ns. Mean WC (cm) in overall cohort was 93 (±10, 95% CI 93–94); in T2DM (94.9 ± 10.3, 95% CI 94–95.7) it was more than ND (91.9 ± 9.6, 95% CI 91.1–92.8), p < 0.0001. Mean WrC (cm) in overall cohort was 16 (±1.3, 95% CI 16–16); in T2DM (16.2 ± 1.3, 95% CI 16.1–16.3) it was more than ND (15.8 ± 1.1, 95% CI 15.7–15.9), p < 0.0001. There was significant correlation between WrC and WC across overall cohort (r 0.49, 95% CI 0.45–0.54 p < 0.0001), in T2DM (r 0.46, 95% CI 0.39–0.53 p < 0.0001), in ND (r 0.51, 95% CI 0.44–0.57 p < 0.0001). Significant correlation between BMI and WrC across overall cohort (r 0.5, 95% CI 0.46–0.55 p < 0.0001) in T2DM (r 0.52, 95% CI 0.46–0.58 p < 0.0001), in ND (r 0.50, 95% CI 0.44–0.56 p < 0.0001). Significant correlation between BMI and WC across overall cohort (r 0.53, 95% CI 0.49–0.57 p < 0.0001) in T2DM (r 0.55, 95% CI 0.48–0.6 p < 0.0001), in ND (r 0.54, 95% CI 0.48–0.59 p < 0.0001). Discussion: The significant positive correlation of wrist circumference with waist circumference and BMI enables wrist circumference to be considered as a new measure of anthropometric assessment, irrespective of the presence or absence of diabetes. It is easy, quick, and convenient to measure than waist circumference, especially in daily clinical practice. Our findings need corroboration with larger epidemiological studies, involving varied multi-ethnic population.