Diagnosis of metabolic syndrome in nursing professionals: An accuracy study.

Érica Velasco Dias Gomes, Rebeca de Souza Vasconcelos, Natália Maria Freitas Coelho, Lorena de Carvalho Almeida,Dandara Almeida Reis da Silva,Monique Magnavita Borba da Fonseca Cerqueira, Jeane Magnavita da Fonseca Cerqueira,Sarah Dos Santos Conceição, Johelle de Santana Passos Soares, Lucélia Batista Neves Cunha Magalhães,Iracema Lua, Ana Claúdia Morais Godoy Figueredo, Vitória Cézar Santos Gonçalves Brito,Sandra Lúcia Fernandes, Dayanne de Aguiar Viana, Ruan Pablo Duarte Freitas, Gabriella Moreira Requião, Luiz Alberto da Silva Lima, Barbara Kraychete Hayes,Isabelle Matos Pinheiro, Maurício Mitsuo Monção, Antônio Carlos Dos Santos Souza,Simone Seixas da Cruz,Antônio Marcos Tosoli Gomes,Rodrigo Fernandes Weyll Pimentel, Barbara Oliveira Nardes, Letícia Costa Lopes, Neiva Sueli Santana Gonçalves Bastos, Argemiro D'Oliveira,Magno Conceição das Mercês,Julita Maria Freitas Coelho

PloS one(2024)

Cited 0|Views1
No score
Abstract
Metabolic Syndrome (MetS) represents a group of cardiovascular risk factors. This article aims to evaluate the accuracy of the tools of MetS diagnosis in Nursing professionals from Primary Health Care (PHC) in Bahia, Brazil. A cross-sectional study with a random sample selected according to essential health information for the diagnostic of MetS. For MetS diagnostic, we used EGIR, NCEP-ATPIII, AACE, IDF, Barbosa et al. (2006), and IDF/AHA/NHLBI (defined as gold standard) definition. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and likelihood ratio were estimated for each diagnostic tool and compared with the gold standard. Kappa statistic was used to determine the agreement between the diagnostic methods. One thousand one hundred and eleven nursing professionals were included in this study. Sensitivity varied from 15% to 95.1%, and specificity varied between 99.5% and 100%. IDF and Barbosa et al. (2006) definitions were more sensitive (95.1% and 92.8%, respectively), and EGIR, NCEP, ATP III, and IDF showed 100% specificity. IDF and Barbosa et al. (2006) use suitable metabolic syndrome identification and confirmation criteria. The highest agreement was found in the definition of the IDF, Barbosa et al. (2006) and the NCEP ATP III. Defining metabolic syndrome with a higher diagnostic accuracy could contribute to the screening and the early identification of nursing professionals with cardiovascular disease risk factors, which provide opportunities for appropriate prevention and treatment.
More
Translated text
AI Read Science
Must-Reading Tree
Example
Generate MRT to find the research sequence of this paper
Chat Paper
Summary is being generated by the instructions you defined