ABSTRACT
Background: Diabetes is global endemic with rapidly increasing prevalence in both developing and developed countries. There is a high risk of cardiovascular diseases in people with type 2 diabetes, while Abnormal lipid profiles and lipoprotein oxidation (especially LDL-C) are more common in diabetics and are aggravated with poor glycaemic control. The aim of the present study is to assess the glycaemic control status by HbA1c estimation and to compare the lipid profile in type 2 diabetes patients with good glycaemic control (HbA1c≤8) & those with poor glycaemic control (HbA1c>8). Materials and methods: The present study was conducted on 100 type-2 diabetic males aged 40-60 years. Among them 48 patients having HbA1c level ≤8% were categorized as having good glycaemic control (group-1)and 52 patients with HbA1c >8% were categorized as having poor glycaemic control(group-2). Result: A significant increase in S.cholesterol(254.46±45.54), s.LDL(162.57±39.79), S.VLDL(45.98±14.69) and S.triglycerides (225. ±76.61) in group-2 pateints (P≤0.05) were noticed as compare to group-1 patients. Our findings suggest positive association between dyslipidemia and glycemic control on the basis of screening with the HbA1c level. Raised triglyceride and LDL levels are established risk factors for coronary artery diseases. Conclusion: The optimal care of diabetic patients should also include periodic screening for lipid abnormalities and periodic measurement of HbA1C for glycaemic control.
ABSTRACT
Stress is inevitable in today’s world however people are different in the way they cope with stress. This study investigated the variable response to stress by the 1ST M.B.B.S. students during their 1ST credit examination. Thirty three male students participated in the study. They were divided into 2 groups, Group I- having less than 6 hours sleep, Group II-having more than 6 hours sleep before exam. Pulse rate was significantly higher in both the groups pre- examination (88±8.4 vs.78±4.47/min and 83.26± 9.96 vs 75.26±9.21/ min) Pre examination Systolic (118±7.27 vs 110±7.37mmHg) as well as Diastolic Blood Pressure (77.89±5.47 vs 72.1±5.05 mmHg) was significantly higher in group II. However the same was not significantly different in group I. On comparing the two groups pre exam none of parameters were significantly different while post exam only systolic BP was significantly higher in group I. Marks obtained in 3 subjects by two groups were not significantly different. Students vary in their response to stress as reflected in the sleep hours, reading habits & cardiac responses. Students having an abnormal sympathetic nerve activity at rest & in response to stressor, may be more susceptible to hypertension in future. The students should be screened and those showing sustained BP response should be followed up periodically.