Availability, affordability, and consumption of fruits and vegetables in 18 countries across income levels: findings from the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study

Background: Several international guidelines recommend the consumption of two servings of fruits and three servings of vegetables per day, but their intake is thought to be low worldwide. We aimed to determine the extent to which such low intake is related to availability and affordability. Methods: We assessed fruit and vegetable consumption using data from country-specific, validated semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaires in the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study, which enrolled participants from communities in 18 countries between Jan 1, 2003, and Dec 31, 2013. We documented household income data from participants in these communities; we also recorded the diversity and non-sale prices of fruits and vegetables from grocery stores and market places between Jan 1, 2009, and Dec 31, 2013. We determined the cost of fruits and vegetables relative to income per household member. Linear random effects models, adjusting for the clustering of households within communities, were used to assess mean fruit and vegetable intake by their relative cost. Findings: Of 143 305 participants who reported plausible energy intake in the food frequency questionnaire, mean fruit and vegetable intake was 3·76 servings (95% CI 3·66–3·86) per day. Mean daily consumption was 2·14 servings (1·93–2·36) in low-income countries (LICs), 3·17 servings (2·99–3·35) in lower-middle-income countries (LMICs), 4·31 servings (4·09–4·53) in upper-middle-income countries (UMICs), and 5·42 servings (5·13–5·71) in high-income countries (HICs). In 130 402 participants who had household income data available, the cost of two servings of fruits and three servings of vegetables per day per individual accounted for 51·97% (95% CI 46·06–57·88) of household income in LICs, 18·10% (14·53–21·68) in LMICs, 15·87% (11·51–20·23) in UMICs, and 1·85% (−3·90 to 7·59) in HICs (ptrend=0·0001). In all regions, a higher percentage of income to meet the guidelines was required in rural areas than in urban areas (p<0·0001 for each pairwise comparison). Fruit and vegetable consumption among individuals decreased as the relative cost increased (ptrend=0·00040). Interpretation: The consumption of fruit and vegetables is low worldwide, particularly in LICs, and this is associated with low affordability. Policies worldwide should enhance the availability and affordability of fruits and vegetables. Funding: Population Health Research Institute, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario, AstraZeneca (Canada), Sanofi-Aventis (France and Canada), Boehringer Ingelheim (Germany and Canada), Servier, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, King Pharma, and national or local organisations in participating countries

Low-molecular-weight or Unfractionated Heparin in Venous Thromboembolism: The Influence of Renal Function

BACKGROUND: In patients with acute venous thromboembolism and renal insufficiency, initial therapy with unfractionated heparin may have some advantages over low-molecular-weight heparin. METHODS: We used the Registro Informatizado de la Enfermedad TromboEmbólica (RIETE) Registry data to evaluate the 15-day outcome in 38,531 recruited patients. We used propensity score matching to compare patients treated with unfractionated heparin with those treated with low-molecular-weight heparin in 3 groups stratified by creatinine clearance levels at baseline: >60 mL/min, 30 to 60 mL/min, or <30 mL/min. RESULTS: Patients initially receiving unfractionated heparin therapy (n = 2167) more likely had underlying diseases than those receiving low-molecular-weight heparin (n = 34,665). Propensity score-matched groups of patients with creatinine clearance levels >60 mL/min (n = 1598 matched pairs), 30 to 60 mL/min (n = 277 matched pairs), and <30 mL/min (n = 210 matched pairs) showed an increased 15-day mortality for unfractionated heparin compared with low-molecular-weight heparin (4.5% vs 2.4% [P = .001], 5.4% vs 5.8% [P = not significant], and 15% vs 8.1% [P = .02], respectively), an increased rate of fatal pulmonary embolism (2.8% vs 1.2% [P = .001], 3.2% vs 2.5% [P = not significant], and 5.7% vs 2.4% [P = .02], respectively), and a similar rate of fatal bleeding (0.3% vs 0.3%, 0.7% vs 0.7%, and 0.5% vs 0.0%, respectively). Multivariate analysis confirmed that patients treated with unfractionated heparin were at increased risk for all-cause death (odds ratio, 1.8; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-2.4) and fatal pulmonary embolism (odds ratio, 2.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-3.6). CONCLUSIONS: In comparison with low-molecular-weight heparin, initial therapy with unfractionated heparin was associated with a higher mortality and higher rate of fatal pulmonary embolism in patients with creatinine clearance levels >60 mL/min or <30 mL/min, but not in those with levels between 30 and 60 mL/min