Panacea Index Logo

Command Palette

Search for a command to run...

Low-glycemic index foods improve long-term glycemic control in NIDDM.

Diabetes care
February 1, 1991
J C Brand et al. (6 authors)
Comparative StudyJournal ArticleResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tHuman Study
Study Details

Study Goal

The researchers aimed to compare the effects of high- and low-glycemic index (GI) diets on glycemic control and plasma lipids in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM).

Results Summary

The low-GI diet modestly improved long-term glycemic control (11% lower glycosylated hemoglobin and reduced plasma glucose profile) compared to the high-GI diet, but no significant differences were observed in plasma lipids.

Population

Sixteen subjects with well-controlled NIDDM and normal lipid profile, 10 of whom continued oral hypoglycemic medication.

Effective Dosage

Not specified (diets were matched for macronutrient composition and fiber).

Duration

Not specified (weekly dietitian visits mentioned).

Interactions

None mentioned.

Extracted Claims (6)
InterventionDirectionEndpointPopulationDosageImpactClaim #
low-glycemic index (GI) diet
increase
glycemic control
subjects with well-controlled non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) and normal lipid profile
-
improved
#1
low-glycemic index (GI) diet
decrease
mean glycosylated hemoglobin
subjects with well-controlled non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) and normal lipid profile
11% lower (7.0 +/- 0.3% vs. 7.9 +/- 0.5%)
was 11% lower
#2
low-glycemic index (GI) diet
decrease
8-h plasma glucose profile (area under the curve above fasting)
subjects with well-controlled non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) and normal lipid profile
128 +/- 23 vs. 148 +/- 22 mmol.h-1.L-1
was lower
#3
low-glycemic index (GI) diet
no change
mean fasting plasma glucose
subjects with well-controlled non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) and normal lipid profile
-
did not show important differences
#4
low-glycemic index (GI) diet
no change
total cholesterol triglycerides
subjects with well-controlled non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) and normal lipid profile
-
did not show important differences
#5
low-glycemic index (GI) diet
no change
lipoproteins
subjects with well-controlled non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) and normal lipid profile
-
did not show important differences
#6
Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare high- and low-glycemic index (GI) diets in the treatment of non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Sixteen subjects with well-controlled NIDDM and normal lipid profile, 10 of whom continued oral hypoglycemic medication, participated in the study. A diet that emphasized low-GI foods (e.g., porridge, pasta) was compared with a high-GI diet (e.g., processed cereals, potatoes). The GI of the low-GI diet was 15% lower than the high-GI diet (77 +/- 3 vs. 91 +/- 1) but otherwise similar in macronutrient composition and fiber, as determined by a 4-day weighed record. The diets were instituted under instruction from a dietitian who visited subjects at home on a weekly basis. Body weight was maintained within 1-2 kg. RESULTS: Glycemic control was improved on the low-GI diet compared with the high-GI diet (statistically significant findings, P less than 0.05). Mean glycosylated hemoglobin at the end of the low-GI diet was 11% lower (7.0 +/- 0.3%) than at the end of the high-GI diet (7.9 +/- 0.5%), and the 8-h plasma glucose profile was lower (area under the curve above fasting 128 +/- 23 vs. 148 +/- 22 mmol.h-1.L-1, respectively). Mean fasting plasma glucose, total cholesterol triglycerides, and lipoproteins did not show important differences. CONCLUSIONS: A low-GI diet gives a modest improvement in long-term glycemic control but not plasma lipids in normolipidemic well-controlled subjects with NIDDM.

Medical Subject Headings (MeSH)
Blood GlucoseC-PeptideDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Diet, DiabeticDietary CarbohydratesHypoglycemic AgentsInsulinLipoproteinsTriglycerides
Study Links
Quality Scores
Safety85
Efficacy75/10
Quality70/10
Citation Metrics
Total Citations209
Citations/Year6.1
Relative Citation Ratio7.83
NIH Percentile96.7%
Research Impact Scores
APT Score0.95
Weight Score0.19
Normalized Score0.78
Related Supplements