Disparities exist between National food group recommendations and the dietary intakes of women

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Preconception and pregnancy dietary intakes can influence the health of future generations. In this study we compared the food intakes of reproductive-aged women by pregnancy status, to current Australian recommendations.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Data are from the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women's Health, younger cohort aged 25-30 years in 2003, with self-reported status as pregnant (n = 606), trying to conceive (n = 454), given birth in the last 12 months (n = 829) or other (n = 5597). Diet was assessed using a validated 74-item food frequency questionnaire. Food group servings and nutrient intakes were compared to the Australian Guide to Healthy Eating (AGHE) and Australian Nutrient Reference Values (NRVs).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>No women met all AGHE food group recommendations. Highest adherence rates [mean (95% CI) servings/day] were for meat [85%, 1.9(1.8-1.9)], fruit [44%, 2.1(2.1-2.2)] and dairy [35%, 1.8(1.8-1.9)], with < 14% meeting remaining recommendations. Women who achieved NRVs (folate, iron, calcium, zinc, fibre) for pregnancy, breastfeeding and adult life stages were 1.5%, 3.3% and 13.7%, respectively. Compared to AGHE, women consumed more servings of fruit (4.9 vs 4.0;<it>P </it>= 0.034) and dairy (3.4 vs 2.0;<it>P </it>= 0.006) to achieve pregnancy NRVs; more dairy (2.9 vs 2.0;<it>P </it>= 0.001), less fruit (3.9 vs 5.0;<it>P </it>< .001) and vegetables (3.4 vs 7.0;<it>P </it>< .001) to achieve breastfeeding NRVs; more fruit (3.6 vs 3.0;<it>P </it>< .001), dairy (2.5 vs 2.0;<it>P </it>< .001), meat (1.8 vs 1.5;<it>P </it>= 0.015), less vegetables (3.6 vs 5.0;<it>P </it>< .001) to achieve adult NRVs.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The AGHE does not align with contemporary diets of Australian women or enable them to meet all NRVs. Current tools to guide food consumption by women during pregnancy require revision.</p

Predicted contribution of folic acid fortification of corn masa flour to the usual folic acid intake for the US population: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2001–2004

Background: Folic acid can prevent up to 70% of neural tube defects (NTDs) if taken before pregnancy. Compared with other race-ethnicities, Hispanic women have higher rates of NTDs, lower rates of folic acid supplement use, and lower total folic acid intakes. Objective: The objective was to assess potential effects of fortifying corn masa flour with folic acid on Mexican American women and other segments of the US population. Design: A model was developed by using data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2001-2004 to estimate the folic acid content in foods containing corn masa flour if fortified at a level of 140 ug folic acid/100 g corn masa flour. Results: Had corn masa flour fortification occurred, we estimated that Mexican American women aged 15-44 y could have increased their total usual daily folic acid intake by 19.9% and non-Hispanic white women by 4.2%. Among the US population, estimated relative percentage increases in total usual daily folic acid intake with corn masa flour fortification were greatest among Mexican Americans (16.8%) and lowest among children aged 1-3 y (2%) and adults aged \u3e51 y (0-0.5%). Conclusion: Analyses suggest that corn masa flour fortification would have effectively targeted Mexican Americans, specifically, Mexican American women, without substantially increasing folic acid intake among other segments of the population. Such increases could reduce the disparity in total folic acid intake between Mexican American and non-Hispanic white women of childbearing age and implies that an additional NTD preventive benefit would be observed for Mexican American women

A randomised controlled trial to evaluate the impact of a human rights based approach to dementia care in inpatient ward and care home settings

BackgroundAlthough it is widely recognised that adopting a person-centred approach is beneficial in the care of people living with dementia, a gap remains between the rhetoric and the reality of quality care. Some widely adopted care practices can result in the personhood of this group being threatened and their human rights being undermined.ObjectivesTo evaluate the impact of applying a human rights based approach in dementia inpatient wards and care homes on the quality of care delivered and the well-being of the person living with dementia.DesignA cluster randomised design was employed to compare the impact of implementing a human rights based approach intervention (i.e. training, applying the ‘Getting It Right’ assessment tool and receiving booster sessions) at 10 intervention sites with 10 control sites.SettingEight NHS dementia inpatient wards and 12 care homes in the north-west of England.ParticipantsPeople living with dementia who were residing on dementia inpatient wards or in care homes, and staff working at these sites. The aim was to recruit 280 people living with dementia.InterventionsA sample of staff (an average of 8.9 per site) at each of the sites was trained in a human rights based approach to care, including the application of the ‘Getting It Right’ assessment tool. The tool was then introduced at the site and monthly booster sessions were delivered.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome measure used in the research was the Quality of Life in Alzheimer’s Disease scale to assess the subjective well-being of the person with dementia. Secondary outcome measures included measures of the quality of care provided (dementia care mapping) and direct measures of the effectiveness of the training in increasing knowledge of and attitudes towards human rights. The study also included an economic evaluation utilising the EuroQol-5 Dimensions, three-level version, and the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit measure.ResultsThe study recruited 439 people living with dementia: 213 to the intervention arm and 226 to the control arm. Primary outcome data were analysed using a linear mixed model. There were no significant differences found in the reported quality of life of residents between the control and intervention groups after the intervention [F(1,16.51) = 3.63;p = 0.074]. The mean difference between the groups was 1.48 (95% confidence interval –7.86 to 10.82).ConclusionsDespite the fact that the training increased staff knowledge of and positive attitudes towards human rights, and although there were some changes in staff decision-making strategies in clinical situations, there was no change in the quality of care provided or in the reported well-being of people living with dementia in these settings. This led to questions about the efficacy of training in bringing about cultural change and improving care practices.LimitationsThere was limited uptake of the training and booster sessions that were integral to the intervention.Future workFuture work could usefully focus on understanding the difficulty in translating change in attitude and knowledge into behaviour.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN94553028.FundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full inHealth Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 6, No. 13. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.</jats:sec