Amy Kristin White1, Bernard Venn2, Louise Weiwei Lu3, Elaine Rush3, Luigi Maria Gallo4, Janet Lee Ching Yong2, Mauro Farella5. 1. Department of Oral Sciences, University of Otago, New Zealand. 2. Department of Human Nutrition, University of Otago, New Zealand. 3. Centre for Child Health Research, Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand. 4. Centre for Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Switzerland. 5. Department of Oral Sciences, University of Otago, New Zealand. Electronic address: mauro.farella@otago.ac.nz.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Previous attempts to identify an 'obese eating style' have led to conflicting findings. This observational study compared the chewing features of overweight or obese young adults with those of normal range BMI. We hypothesised that chewing features are individual-specific and differ between participants of a normal BMI and high BMI. METHODS: Fourteen overweight to obese participants (BMI≥25.0) were pairwise matched with 14 normal range BMI participants (18.5<BMI<25.0). Masticatory muscle activity was recorded using portable recorders during consumption of two rice meals in a laboratory setting and one pizza meal in the natural environment. A previously validated algorithm was used to assess time-frequency features of chewing episodes, including rate, duration, and power. Masticatory performance was assessed by a sieve test and was expressed as the percentage of particles ≤2mm after a standardised chewing test. RESULTS: Regardless of the meal, chewing rate was remarkably consistent among participants (ICC=0.89; 95% CI=0.79-0.94). Chewing rate did not differ between high and normal BMI participants (p>0.05), whereas chewing power was significantly higher in high BMI participants (p<0.05). No other differences in chewing characteristics were found between BMI groups. Participants chewed at similar rate in the natural environment (pizza) and in the laboratory (rice) setting (p>0.05). Masticatory performance did not differ significantly (p>0.05) between the high (55.9%) and normal (52.4%) BMI groups. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of the present study, chewing characteristics appear to be individual-specific with wide variability. Overweight participants chew at a similar rate to control participants, albeit slightly stronger. Our preliminary findings need to be replicated in larger samples.
OBJECTIVE: Previous attempts to identify an 'obese eating style' have led to conflicting findings. This observational study compared the chewing features of overweight or obese young adults with those of normal range BMI. We hypothesised that chewing features are individual-specific and differ between participants of a normal BMI and high BMI. METHODS: Fourteen overweight to obeseparticipants (BMI≥25.0) were pairwise matched with 14 normal range BMI participants (18.5<BMI<25.0). Masticatory muscle activity was recorded using portable recorders during consumption of two rice meals in a laboratory setting and one pizza meal in the natural environment. A previously validated algorithm was used to assess time-frequency features of chewing episodes, including rate, duration, and power. Masticatory performance was assessed by a sieve test and was expressed as the percentage of particles ≤2mm after a standardised chewing test. RESULTS: Regardless of the meal, chewing rate was remarkably consistent among participants (ICC=0.89; 95% CI=0.79-0.94). Chewing rate did not differ between high and normal BMI participants (p>0.05), whereas chewing power was significantly higher in high BMI participants (p<0.05). No other differences in chewing characteristics were found between BMI groups. Participants chewed at similar rate in the natural environment (pizza) and in the laboratory (rice) setting (p>0.05). Masticatory performance did not differ significantly (p>0.05) between the high (55.9%) and normal (52.4%) BMI groups. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of the present study, chewing characteristics appear to be individual-specific with wide variability. Overweight participants chew at a similar rate to control participants, albeit slightly stronger. Our preliminary findings need to be replicated in larger samples.
Authors: Anna Fogel; Ai Ting Goh; Lisa R Fries; Suresh Anand Sadananthan; S Sendhil Velan; Navin Michael; Mya Thway Tint; Marielle Valerie Fortier; Mei Jun Chan; Jia Ying Toh; Yap-Seng Chong; Kok Hian Tan; Fabian Yap; Lynette P Shek; Michael J Meaney; Birit F P Broekman; Yung Seng Lee; Keith M Godfrey; Mary Foong Fong Chong; Ciarán G Forde Journal: Physiol Behav Date: 2017-02-14
Authors: Jimmy Alex; Dusty Turner; Diana M Thomas; Andrew McDougall; Mirna W Halawani; Steven B Heymsfield; Corby K Martin; Jenna L Scisco; James Salley; Eric Muth; Adam W Hoover Journal: BMC Nutr Date: 2018-05-18