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

The association between portion size, nutrient intake and gestational weight gain : A secondary analysis in the WATCH study 2006/7

Background: Excessive gestational weight gain (GWG) is associated with adverse maternal-child health outcomes. Managing energy intake and GWG versus optimising nutrient intake can be challenging. The present study aimed to examine the relationships between dietary portion size, GWG and nutrient intakes during pregnancy. It is hypothesised that, after adjustment for potential confounders, portion size would be positively associated with both GWG and nutrient intakes during pregnancy. Methods: Prospective data were obtained for 179 Australian women from the Women and Their Children's Health Study. A validated food frequency questionnaire was used at 18-24 and 36-40 weeks of gestation to quantify diet and portion size during the previous 3 months of pregnancy. Nutrient intakes were compared with Australian Nutrient Reference Values (NRVs). GWG was measured up to 36 weeks and compared with the Institute of Medicine weight gain recommendations (WtAdh). Results: In multivariate regression models, portion size factor (PSF) was positively associated with GWG in women with high socio-economic status (SES; β = 0.20, P = 0.04) and those with an overweight/obese pre-pregnancy body mass index (BMI) (β = 0.28, P = 0.04). PSF uniquely accounted for 8.2% and 3.7% of the variability in GWG for women with high SES and overweight/obese pre-pregnancy BMIs, respectively. Nutrient intakes and PSF were similar regardless of WtAdh. Women achieved NRVs for calcium and zinc in all PSF categories. Most of the women with large PSF still failed to achieve the NRVs for folate (95.7%), iron (89.6%) and fibre (85.5%). Conclusions: All women require advice on quality food choices during pregnancy to optimise health outcomes. Targeting portion size alone is insufficient to manage GWG but may prove to be a valuable tool in pregnant women of high SES and/or those who are overweight/obese pre-pregnancy.</p