| Literature DB >> 28438173 |
Maria Cristina Savanelli1, Luigi Barrea1, Paolo Emidio Macchia2, Silvia Savastano3, Andrea Falco1, Andrea Renzullo3, Elisabetta Scarano3, Immacolata Cristina Nettore3, Annamaria Colao3, Carolina Di Somma4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nutrition is an environmental factor affecting bone health. Nutrition is considered essential to achieve and maintain optimal bone mass. Mediterranean diet (MD) has shown to prevent bone disease. Aim of this study is to investigate the relationship between bone health status and adherence the MD.Entities:
Keywords: Bone health; Calcaneal quantitative ultrasound (QUS) scanner; Environmental factors; Imaging techniques; Mediterranean diet
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28438173 PMCID: PMC5404307 DOI: 10.1186/s12967-017-1184-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Transl Med ISSN: 1479-5876 Impact factor: 5.531
Anthropometric measurement and bone health status assessment
| Parameters | Patients |
|---|---|
| Age (years) | 50.2 ± 14.0 |
| Anthropometric variables | |
| Weight (kg) | 71.0 (46.0–147.0) |
| Height (m) | 1.6 (1.4–1.9) |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 26.4 (18.2–39.9) |
| Normal weight n (%) | 147 (35.2%) |
| Overweight n (%) | 181 (43.3%) |
| Obesity grade I n (%) | 66 (15.8%) |
| Obesity grade II n (%) | 24 (5.7%) |
| WC (cm) men | 98.6 ± 10.0 |
| WC (cm) women | 90.7 ± 12.5 |
| HC (cm) men | 102.0 (80.0–135.0) |
| HC (cm) women | 102.0 (68.0–147.0) |
| WHR men | 1.0 (0.8–1.1) |
| WHR women | 0.9 (0.6–1.2) |
| Bone health status assessment | |
| T-score | −1.0 (−3.6–3.6) |
| Qui/Stiff | 87.3 ± 19.8 |
| BMD | 0.5 ± 0.1 |
The mean BMI was 26.7 ± 3.1 kg/m2 for men and 27.1 ± 4.6 kg/m2 for women. According to BMI, the majority of subjects was in the overweight range. Values of WC higher that the optimal cut offs were found in 36.2% of men and in 57.5% of women
BMI, body mass index; WC, waist circumference; HC, hip circumference; WHR, waist-to-hip ratio; QUI/Stiff, quantitative ultrasound index/stiffness; BMD, bone mineral density
Prevalence of osteoporosis and osteopenia according to gender
| Parameters | All patients | Men | Women |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Normal | 193, 46.3 | 51, 49.0 | 142, 45.4 | 0.21 | 0.648 |
| Osteopenia | 192, 46.0 | 50, 48.1 | 142, 45.4 | 0.08 | 0.774 |
| Osteoporosis | 33, 7.7 | 4, 2.9 | 29, 9.2 | 2.51 | 0.113 |
In all subjects, prevalences of osteoporosis and osteopenia were 7.7 and 46.0%, respectively
Response frequency of dietary components included in the PREDIMED questionnaire of the subjects
| Questions | n | % | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Use of extra virgin olive oil as main culinary lipid | 322 | 77.0 |
| 2 | Extra virgin olive oil >4 tablespoons | 281 | 67.2 |
| 3 | Vegetables ≥2 servings/day | 398 | 95.2 |
| 4 | Fruits ≥3 servings/day | 370 | 88.5 |
| 5 | Red/processed meats <1/day | 112 | 26.8 |
| 6 | Butter, cream, margarine <1/day | 149 | 35.6 |
| 7 | Soda drinks <1/day | 256 | 61.2 |
| 8 | Wine glasses ≥7/week | 181 | 43.3 |
| 9 | Legumes ≥3/week | 185 | 44.3 |
| 10 | Fish/seafood ≥3/week | 246 | 58.9 |
| 11 | Commercial sweets and confectionery ≤2/week | 223 | 53.3 |
| 12 | Tree nuts ≥3/week | 197 | 47.1 |
| 13 | Poultry more than red meats | 211 | 50.5 |
| 14 | Use of sofrito sauce ≥2/week | 363 | 86.8 |
Fig. 1Total PREDIMED score. Score 0–5, lowest adherence to the Mediterranean diet (MD); score 6–9, average adherence to the MD; score ≥ 10, highest adherence to the MD. PREDIMED, PREvención con DIeta MEDiterránea
Bivariate proportional odds ratio model to assess the association between T-score and food items included in the PREDIMED questionnaire
| Questions | Simple correlation | After adjuster for sex, age and BMI | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR |
| 95% IC | OR |
| 95% IC | ||
| 1 | Use of EVOO as main culinary lipid |
| −0.099–0.220 |
| −0.047–0.298 | ||
| Yes | 3.59 | 3.62 | |||||
| No | 0.75 | 0.74 | |||||
| 2 | EVOO >4 tablespoons |
| 0.096–0.461 |
| 0.079–0.458 | ||
| Yes | 2.06 | 2.08 | |||||
| No | 1.31 | 1.30 | |||||
| 3 | Vegetables ≥2 servings/day |
| 0.131–1.044 |
| 0.035–1.014 | ||
| Yes | 1.75 | 1.63 | |||||
| No | 1.54 | 1.66 | |||||
| 4 | Fruits ≥3 servings/day |
| 0.598–1.312 |
| 0.507–1.250 | ||
| Yes | 2.55 | 2.36 | |||||
| No | 1.06 | 1.15 | |||||
| 5 | Red/processed meats <1/day |
| −0.383–0.004 | 0.139 | −0.347–0.044 | ||
| Yes | 0.82 | 0.86 | |||||
| No | 3.28 | 3.15 | |||||
| 6 | Butter, cream, margarine <1/day | 0.329 | −0.083–0.248 | 0.326 | −0.087–0.261 | ||
| Yes | 1.08 | 1.09 | |||||
| No | 2.50 | 2.49 | |||||
| 7 | Soda drinks <1/day | 0.732 | −0.134–0.194 | 0.062 | −0.005–0.359 | ||
| Yes | 1.02 | 1.19 | |||||
| No | 2.64 | 2.28 | |||||
| 8 | Wine glasses ≥7/week | 0.570 | −0.209–0.114 | 0.648 | −0.131–0.209 | ||
| Yes | 0.95 | 1.04 | |||||
| No | 2.84 | 2.68 | |||||
| 9 | Legumes ≥3/week |
| 0.033–0.359 |
| 0.020–0.360 | ||
| Yes | 2.23 | 1.20 | |||||
| No | 1.21 | 2.25 | |||||
| 10 | Fish/seafood ≥3/week |
| 0.529–0.949 |
| 0.540–0.976 | ||
| Yes | 2.08 | 2.12 | |||||
| No | 1.30 | 1.28 | |||||
| 11 | Sweets and confectionery ≤2/week | 0.594 | −0.203–0.116 | 0.870 | −0.180–0.153 | ||
| Yes | 0.95 | 0.98 | |||||
| No | 2.83 | 2.76 | |||||
| 12 | Tree nuts ≥3/week | 0.179 | −0.273–0.049 | 0.974 | −0.208–0.214 | ||
| Yes | 0.89 | 1 | |||||
| No | 3.03 | 2.70 | |||||
| 13 | Poultry more than red meats | 0.462 | −0.099–0.220 | 0.157 | −0.047–0.298 | ||
| Yes | 1.06 | 1.13 | |||||
| No | 2.56 | 2.40 | |||||
| 14 | Use of sofrito sauce ≥2/week | 0.173 | −0.069–0.429 | 0.103 | −0.037–0.495 | ||
| Yes | 1.18 | 1.24 | |||||
| No | 2.28 | 2.18 | |||||
In the studied population, higher T-scores were positively associated with a higher consumption of some of the Mediterranean food items, in particular extra-virgin olive oil (EVOO), vegetables, fruits, legumes, and fish and were negatively associated with consumption of red meat
EVOO, extra-virgin olive oil; BMI, body mass index
p value in italic emphasis denotes a significant difference (p < 0.05)
Multinomial logistic regression of T-score with PREDIMED score
| PREDIMED score | OR |
| 95% IC |
|---|---|---|---|
| Low adherence | 3.25 |
| 2.95–3.58 |
| Average adherence | 6.80 |
| 6.17–7.49 |
| Higher adherence | 6.91 |
| 6.27–7.61 |
The higher T-score were positively associated with the higher odds of PREDIMED score
PREDIMED, PREvención con DIeta MEDiterránea
p value in italic emphasis denotes a significant difference (p < 0.05)
Multiple regression analysis models (stepwise method) with the T-score as dependent variable to estimate the predictive value of food items of PREDIMED questionnaire
| Parameters | Multiple Regression analysis | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1 | R2 |
| t |
|
| EVOO | 0.173 | 0.419 | 9.41 |
|
| Fish | 0.225 | 0.244 | 5.36 |
|
| Fruit | 0.241 | 0.140 | 3.13 |
|
At multiple regression analysis models, among adherence to the MD and single food items, T-score was well predicted by use EVOO, fish and fruit intake
Variable excluded, other food items of PREDIMED questionnaire
EVOO, extra-virgin olive oil
p value in italic emphasis denotes a significant difference (p < 0.05)
Fig. 2Values of the PREDIMED score predicting the lower T-score. PREDIMED score 3 (α = 0.05, R-squared index = 0.417) was found to be predictive for a lower T-score. The box plot regression shows how the categories under 8 include patients with a critical T-score (−2.5); increasing T-score tends towards range and not include values below −2.5