| Literature DB >> 33182816 |
Miguel López-Moreno1, Maria Teresa Iglesias López2, Marta Miguel1, Marta Garcés-Rimón1,2.
Abstract
As a consequence of COVID-19, millions of households have suffered mobility restrictions and changes in their lifestyle over several months. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effects of COVID-19 home confinement on the food habits, lifestyle and emotional balance of the Spanish population. This cross-sectional study used data collected via an anonymous online questionnaire during the month before lockdown finished in Spain, with a total of 675 participants. 38.8% of the respondents experienced weight gain while 31.1% lost weight during confinement. The increase in body weight was positively correlated with age (Rs = 0.14, p < 0.05) and BMI (Rs = 0.20, p < 0.05). We also identified that 39.7% reported poorer quality sleep, positively correlated with BMI (Rs = -0.18, p < 0.05) and with age (Rs = -0.21, p < 0.05). 44.7% of the participants had not performed physical exercise during confinement with differences by sex (p < 0.05), by age (p < 0.05), by BMI (p < 0.05) and by sleep quality (p < 0.05). According to an emotional-eater questionnaire, 21.8% and 11% were classified as an emotional eater or a very emotional eater, respectively. We emphasize the importance of adopting a healthy lifestyle, as the COVID-19 pandemic is ongoing.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; emotional eating; food intake; home confinement; lifestyle; lockdown
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33182816 PMCID: PMC7696994 DOI: 10.3390/nu12113445
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Figure 1Flow chart of the study participants and blocks of the electronic questionnaire.
General characteristics and demographics of the participants enrolled in the study.
| All ( | Women ( | Men ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 39.1 (SD 12.9) | 39 (SD 12.8) | 39.2 (SD 13.2) | 0.888 |
| Education, | 0.138 | |||
| Until middle School | 6 (0.9) | 2 (0.4) | 4 (2.0) | |
| High School | 31 (4.6) | 19 (4.0) | 12 (5.9) | |
| Vocational Training | 58 (8.6) | 36 (7.6) | 22 (10.8) | |
| Undergraduate | 329 (48.7) | 238 (50.4) | 91 (44.8) | |
| Postgraduate | 181 (26.8) | 127 (26.9) | 54 (26.6) | |
| PhD | 65 (9.6) | 45 (9.5) | 20 (9.9) | |
| Others | 5 (0.7) | 5 (1.1) | 0 (0.0) | |
| Living status during confinement | 0.659 | |||
| Alone | 69 (10.2) | 50 (10.6) | 19 (9.4) | |
| 1 person | 161 (23.9) | 109 (23.1) | 52 (25.6) | |
| 2 people | 158 (23.4) | 106 (22.5) | 52 (25.6) | |
| 3 people | 151 (22.4) | 106 (22.5) | 45 (22.2) | |
| ≥4 people | 136 (20.1) | 101 (21.4) | 35 (17.2) | |
| Home-office, | 0.707 | |||
| Yes | 472 (69.9) | 328 (69.5) | 59 (29.1) | |
| No | 203 (30.1) | 144 (30.5) | 144 (70.9) | |
| Protection used after lockdown | ||||
| Mask | 667 (99.4) | 469 (99.4) | 202 (99.5) |
|
| Gloves | 167 (24.7) | 120 (25.4) | 47 (23.2) | 0.531 |
* p-value by Chi Square test for categorical variables, Mann-Whitney test and Kruskal-Wallis test for continuous variables among two or more groups, respectively. Bold indicates statistical significance (p < 0.05).
Anthropometric parameters: Body Mass Index (BMI) and reported changes in body weight.
| All ( | Women ( | Men ( | Effect Size | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Weight before (kg) | 68.7 (SD 15.3) | 63.5 (SD 13.4) | 80.5 (SD 13.4) |
| 0.056 |
| Weight after (kg) | 68.8 (SD 15.8) | 63.7 (SD 14.2) | 80.5 (SD 13.5) |
| 0.234 |
| Height (m) | 170.3 (SD 35.5) | 166.7 (SD 41.5) | 178.8 (SD 9.9) |
| 0.024 |
| BMI before (kg/m2) | 23.9 (SD 4.9) | 23.4 (SD 5.2) | 25.2 (SD 4.0) |
| 0.031 |
| BMI after (kg/m2) | 24.2 (SD 10.8) | 23.8 (SD 12.6) | 25.2 (SD 4.0) |
| 0.037 |
| Change in body weight (kg) | 0.12 (SD 2.7) | 0.15 (SD 2.6) | 0.07 (SD 2.8) | 0.758 | 0.001 |
* p-value by Mann-Whitney test. Effect size was computed as η2. Bold indicates statistical significance (p < 0.05).
Figure 2Weight change in different BMI groups and by gender. BMI, Body mass index.
Figure 3Changes in lifestyle behaviour during confinement. “Better” indicates an improvement in lifestyle behaviors; “same” indicates that lifestyle habits have been maintained; “worse” indicates a worsening of lifestyle behaviors.
Correlation analysis of anthropometric values with general characteristics and lifestyle.
| Variable | Weight Variation | BMI before Confinement | BMI during Confinement | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rs | Rs | Rs | ||||
| Age | 0.138 |
| 0.297 |
| 0.318 |
|
| Number of meals | −0.055 | 0.15 | −0.089 |
| −0.104 |
|
| Sleep (h/day) | −0.064 | 0.09 | −0.204 |
| −0.202 |
|
| EEQ | 0.192 |
| 0.185 |
| 0.223 |
|
Data presented as Spearman correlation coefficient. Bold indicates statistical significance (p < 0.05). BMI, Body mass index; EEQ, Emotional eater questionnaire.
Changes in weight during confinement according to different characteristics.
| Variable | Number (%) | Weight Change (kg) | Effect Size | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | ||||
| Men | 472 (69.9) | 0.15 | ||
| Women | 203 (30.1) | 0.07 | 0.758 | 0.001 |
| Age (years) * |
| 0.089 | ||
| 18–30 | 167 (24.7) | −0.26 | ||
| 30–65 | 487 (72.1) | 0.27 | ||
| >65 | 21 (3.1) | −0.14 | ||
| Living alone | 0.913 | 0.001 | ||
| No | 69 (10.2) | 0.12 | ||
| Yes | 606 (89.8) | 0.13 | ||
| BMI before confinement | 0.02 | |||
| ≤25 | 455 (67.4) | 0.14 | ||
| >25 | 220 (32.6) | 0.09 | 0.41 | |
| Dietary | 0.009 | |||
| supplements | ||||
| Yes | 137 (20.3) | 0.01 | ||
| No | 538 (79.7) | 0.62 |
| |
| Active smokers | 0.003 | |||
| Yes | 116 (17.2) | 0.33 | ||
| No | 559 (82.8) | 0.08 | 0.985 | |
| Active alcohol drinkers | 0.002 | |||
| Yes | 185 (27.4) | 0.13 | ||
| No | 490 (72.6) | 0.12 | 0.758 | |
| Sleep during confinement |
| 0.006 | ||
| <7 h/day | 143 (21.2) | 0.47 | ||
| ≥7 h/day | 532 (78.8) | 0.03 | ||
| Exercise during confinement | 0.02 | |||
| Yes | 559 (82.8) | −0.05 | ||
| No | 116 (17.2) | 0.9 |
| |
| EEQ * | 0.031 | |||
| Non-emotional eater | 186 (27.6) | −0.37 | ||
| Low emotional eater | 268 (39.7) | −0.06 | ||
| Emotional eater | 147 (21.8) | 0.64 | ||
| Very emotional eater | 74 (11.0) | 1.03 |
|
p by Mann-Whitney test, excepting * p by Kruskal-Wallis test. Bold indicates statistical significance (p < 0.05). Effect size was computed as η2. BMI, body mass index; EEQ, Emotional eater questionnaire.