A carregar...
Publicação
Resposta glicémica a refeição padrão em indivíduos saudáveis
| Nome: | Descrição: | Tamanho: | Formato: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.71 MB | Adobe PDF |
Autores
Orientador(es)
Resumo(s)
Objetivo: O presente estudo teve como propósito avaliar a resposta glicémica pós-prandial de alimentos específicos, o nível de saciedade associado e o cálculo do Índice Glicémico e Carga Glicémica, dos mesmos. Metodologia: foram recolhidos e analisados dados de 30 indivíduos jovens saudáveis (n=30), que cumpriam os critérios de inclusão. Existiram 7 momentos de recolha de dados (3 controlo;; 4 alimentos teste), em dias distintos. Para cada momento, foram recolhidos os valores de glicemia capilar, aos momentos: 0, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90 e 120 minutos, sendo preenchida uma escala de fome, em simultâneo. A metodologia usada para a obtenção de IG foi baseada na literatura.67,69 Os dados foram tratados estatisticamente através do software SPSS 22.0. Resultados: os valores médios da resposta glicémica pós-prandial são: BM (104,4);; MÇ (97,5);; MBm (104,1);; MA (94,7);; PTGOm (106). Os valores de IG encontrados foram: BM (81,5%);; MÇ (55,2%);; MBm (74,8%);; MA (40,1%). Os valores de CG dos alimentos testados foram: BM (40,8);; MÇ (27,6);; MBm (37,4);; MA (10,8). Os valores médios para o nível de saciedade são: BM (1,9);; MÇ (1,5);; MBm (1,6);; MA (1,6);; PTGO (3,1). O valor de IG e CG da MÇ (55,2%/ 27,6) sobe quando combinado com MBm (74,8%/37,4) e desce quando combinado com MA (40,1/10,8) – esta diferença apresenta-se como estatisticamente significativas. O valor médio do nível de saciedade da MÇ (1,5) diminui quando combinado com MBm (1,6) e MA (1,6) – estas diferenças não são estatisticamente significativas. Conclusões: concluímos que o IG da BM é considerado elevado, mesmo quando comparado com outras bolachas, ficando aquém daquilo que é considerado uma boa opção nutricional. Quando comparadas as duas refeições intermédias testadas, relativamente ao valor de CG, verificamos que a opção que incluí a amêndoa, tem um valor absoluto mais baixo do que a opção que incluí bolacha maria. Os valores de IG, são diretamente proporcionais aos de resposta glicémica, sendo que os valores mais elevados correspondem à BM (81,5%/104,4) e os valores mínimos correspondem à combinação MA (40,1%/94,7). Relativamente ao nível de saciedade das refeições intermédias testadas, verificamos que não existem diferenças, o que associado aos valores encontrados para a CG, reforça, mais ainda, que a opção para refeição intermédia, MA, é nutricionalmente mais indicada. Palavras-chave: índice glicémico;; carga glicémica;; resposta glicémica pós-prandial.
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the postprandial glycemic response of specific foods, the level of associated satiety and their Glycemic Index (GI) and Glycemic Load values (GL). Methods: The data of 30 healthy young subjects (n = 30) who met the inclusion criteria were collected and analyzed. The data collection was conducted in 7 moments (3 control, 4 test foods), on different days. For each moment were collected blood glucose values at 0, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90 and 120 minutes, being filled a hunger scale simultaneously. The methodology used to obtain the GI was based on literature. 67,69 The data were statistically analyzed using SPSS 22.0 software. Results: The medium values of the postprandial glycemic response are: BM (104.4);; MÇ (97.5);; MBm (104.1);; MA (94.7);; PTGOm (106). We found the following GI values: BM (81,5%);; MÇ (55,2%);; MBm (74,8%);; MA (40,1%). The GL values of the foods tested were: BM (40,8);; MÇ (27,6);; MBm (37,4);; MA (10,8). The medium values for the level of satietywere: BM (1,9);; MÇ (1,5);; MBm (1,6);; MA (1,6);; PTGO (3,1). The value of GI and GL MC (55.2% / 27.6) rises when combined with MBm (74.8% / 37.4) and decreases when combined with MA (40.1 / 10.8) - this difference is statistically significant. The average value of the level of satiety MC (1.5) decreases when combined with MBm (1,6) and MA (1.6) - these differences are not statistically significant. Conclusion: The GI BM is considered high, even when compared with other cookies and can’t be considered as a good nutritional choice. When comparing the two tested intermediate meals, in relation to the value of GL, we find that the option with almond has a lower absolute value than the option that includes Maria biscuit. The GI values are directly proportional to the glycemic response, and the highest values correspond to BM (81.5%/ 104.4) and the minimum values correspond to the combination MA (40.1% / 94.7). Regarding the level of satiety of the tested intermediate meals, we found that there are no differences, which associated with the values found for the GL, reinforces even more that the choice for intermediate meal, MA, is nutritionally more appropriate. Keywords: Glycemic Index (GI);; Glycemic Load values (GL). Glycemic response.
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the postprandial glycemic response of specific foods, the level of associated satiety and their Glycemic Index (GI) and Glycemic Load values (GL). Methods: The data of 30 healthy young subjects (n = 30) who met the inclusion criteria were collected and analyzed. The data collection was conducted in 7 moments (3 control, 4 test foods), on different days. For each moment were collected blood glucose values at 0, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90 and 120 minutes, being filled a hunger scale simultaneously. The methodology used to obtain the GI was based on literature. 67,69 The data were statistically analyzed using SPSS 22.0 software. Results: The medium values of the postprandial glycemic response are: BM (104.4);; MÇ (97.5);; MBm (104.1);; MA (94.7);; PTGOm (106). We found the following GI values: BM (81,5%);; MÇ (55,2%);; MBm (74,8%);; MA (40,1%). The GL values of the foods tested were: BM (40,8);; MÇ (27,6);; MBm (37,4);; MA (10,8). The medium values for the level of satietywere: BM (1,9);; MÇ (1,5);; MBm (1,6);; MA (1,6);; PTGO (3,1). The value of GI and GL MC (55.2% / 27.6) rises when combined with MBm (74.8% / 37.4) and decreases when combined with MA (40.1 / 10.8) - this difference is statistically significant. The average value of the level of satiety MC (1.5) decreases when combined with MBm (1,6) and MA (1.6) - these differences are not statistically significant. Conclusion: The GI BM is considered high, even when compared with other cookies and can’t be considered as a good nutritional choice. When comparing the two tested intermediate meals, in relation to the value of GL, we find that the option with almond has a lower absolute value than the option that includes Maria biscuit. The GI values are directly proportional to the glycemic response, and the highest values correspond to BM (81.5%/ 104.4) and the minimum values correspond to the combination MA (40.1% / 94.7). Regarding the level of satiety of the tested intermediate meals, we found that there are no differences, which associated with the values found for the GL, reinforces even more that the choice for intermediate meal, MA, is nutritionally more appropriate. Keywords: Glycemic Index (GI);; Glycemic Load values (GL). Glycemic response.
Descrição
Tese de mestrado, Doenças Metabólicas e Comportamento Alimentar, Universidade de Lisboa, Faculdade de Medicina, 2018
Palavras-chave
Índice glicémico Carga glicémica Resposta glicémica pós-prandial Teses de mestrado - 2018