| Literature DB >> 33663640 |
Marialaura Bonaccio1, Simona Costanzo1, Emilia Ruggiero1, Mariarosaria Persichillo1, Simona Esposito1, Marco Olivieri2, Augusto Di Castelnuovo3, Chiara Cerletti1, Maria Benedetta Donati1, Giovanni de Gaetano1, Licia Iacoviello1,4.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate changes in ultra-processed food (UPF) intake and its major correlates during the first Italian lockdown (9 March-3 May 2020).Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; Diet quality; Dietary changes; Lockdown; Ultra-processed food
Year: 2021 PMID: 33663640 PMCID: PMC8207556 DOI: 10.1017/S1368980021000999
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Public Health Nutr ISSN: 1368-9800 Impact factor: 4.022
Socio-demographic characteristics of the two cohorts analysed in the current study, Italy 2020
| Both cohorts ( | ALT RISCOVID-19 ( | Moli-LOCK ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years; mean ± | 57·9 ± 15·3 | 47·9 ± 14·0 | 67·8 ± 8·5 |
| Men | 40·4 | 36·8 | 43·9 |
| Geographical areas | |||
| Northern | 17·3 | 34·7 | 0·0 |
| Central | 6·7 | 13·3 | 0·1 |
| Southern and Islands | 74·4 | 48·7 | 99·9 |
| Living area | |||
| ≥200 000 inhabitants | 11·4 | 22·7 | 0·1 |
| <200 000 inhabitants | 11·9 | 23·7 | 0·2 |
| <50 000 inhabitants | 54·2 | 24·1 | 84·1 |
| Villages/rural areas | 22·5 | 29·4 | 15·5 |
| Postgraduate education | 45·3 | 70·0 | 20·8 |
| Household income >40 000 EUR/years | 24·0 | 33·9 | 14·1 |
| Marital status | |||
| Married/in couple | 73·1 | 63·4 | 82·8 |
| Single | 15·6 | 27·3 | 3·9 |
| Divorced | 5·4 | 7·2 | 3·5 |
| Widower | 5·9 | 2·1 | 9·8 |
| Occupational class | |||
| Professional/managerial | 42·6 | 58·0 | 27·3 |
| Skilled non-manual | 30·6 | 22·3 | 38·8 |
| Skilled manual | 5·0 | 3·1 | 6·8 |
| Partly skilled/unskilled | 6·2 | 1·8 | 10·5 |
| Unemployed/unclassified | 15·6 | 14·8 | 16·5 |
Values are percentages unless otherwise stated.
Numbers do not add up to 100 % due to missing data.
Self-rated changes (%) in the consumption of ultra-processed food during the COVID-19 outbreak confinement in Italy (9 March – 3 May 2020), Italy 2020
| Self-reported changes | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Food items | Unchanged (%) | Increased (%) | Decreased (%) | Overall percent change (%) |
|
| Pizza | 59·3 | 31·2 | 9·6 | +21·6 | <0·0001 |
| Biscuits | 75·8 | 18·0 | 6·2 | +11·8 | <0·0001 |
| Chocolate | 73·9 | 18·6 | 7·5 | +11·1 | <0·0001 |
| Bread substitutes | 80·3 | 11·8 | 7·9 | +3·9 | <0·0001 |
| Fruit yogurt | 87·1 | 7·7 | 5·2 | +2·5 | <0·0001 |
| Breakfast cereals, cereal bars | 90·1 | 4·3 | 5·6 | −1·3 | 0·017 |
| Sweet packaged snacks | 76·8 | 10·5 | 12·7 | −2·2 | 0·011 |
| Ready-to-heat potatoes and potato croquettes | 83·3 | 6·8 | 9·9 | −3·1 | <0·0001 |
| Packaged bread | 81·4 | 7·7 | 10·9 | −3·2 | <0·0001 |
| Fruit drinks (e.g. nectars) | 87·9 | 4·2 | 7·9 | −3·7 | <0·0001 |
| Savoury packaged snacks | 80·0 | 7·5 | 12·5 | −5·0 | <0·0001 |
| Fish nuggets and sticks | 86·5 | 4·1 | 9·4 | −5·3 | <0·0001 |
| Reconstituted meat products | 83·9 | 5·0 | 11·1 | −6·1 | <0·0001 |
| Ready-to-heat vegetables | 83·6 | 5·0 | 11·4 | −6·4 | <0·0001 |
| Soft drinks | 83·0 | 4·7 | 12·3 | −7·6 | <0·0001 |
| Croissants | 79·6 | 6·2 | 14·2 | −8·0 | <0·0001 |
| Instant sauces | 85·4 | 3·2 | 11·4 | −8·2 | <0·0001 |
| Plant-based meat substitutes | 88·6 | 1·2 | 10·2 | −9·0 | <0·0001 |
| Plant-based cheese substitutes (e.g. tofu) | 88·8 | 0·8 | 10·4 | −9·6 | <0·0001 |
One-way χ 2 test of increased v. decreased consumption.
Fig. 1Changes in intake of nineteen ultra-processed foods (UPF) during the Italian lockdown (9 March – 3 May 2020). Radar plots show changes in consumption (increase/decrease) of each food item included in the UPF score along a vertical axis starting in the centre of the circle (0 % change)
Fig. 2Overall variation in ultra-processed food (UPF) intake during the Italian lockdown (9 March – 3 May 2020) following the COVID-19 pandemic and separately in the ALT RISCOVID-19 and Moli-LOCK study cohorts. , Stable; , mild increase; , high increase; , mild decrease; , high decrease
Association of demographic and socio-economic factors with self-rated changes in ultra-processed food (UPF) consumption during the Italian lockdown following the COVID-19 pandemic (9 March – 3 May 2020) by means of adjusted regression coefficients (β) with 95 % CI and P-value, Italy 2020
| % | UPF score mean |
|
| 95 % CI |
|
| 95 % CI |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age groups (years) | |||||||||
| 18–39 | 14·8 | −0·36 | 5·21 | Ref. | Ref. | ||||
| 40–55 | 23·7 | −0·53 | 5·35 | −0·51 | −0·99, −0·03 | 0·039 | −0·84 | −0·38, −0·31 | 0·002 |
| 56–65 | 24·4 | −0·21 | 3·76 | −0·87 | −1·39, −0·34 | 0·001 | −1·35 | −1·94, −0·75 | <0·0001 |
| 66–75 | 26·8 | −0·14 | 2·73 | −1·26 | −1·82, −0·70 | <0.0001 | −1·83 | −2·48, −1·19 | <0·0001 |
| >75 | 10·3 | −0·09 | 1·81 | −1·38 | −2·06, −0·70 | <0·0001 | −1·94 | −2·72, −1·17 | <0·0001 |
| Sex | |||||||||
| Women | 59·6 | −0·48 | 4·47 | Ref. | Ref. | ||||
| Men | 40·4 | 0·02 | 3·37 | 0·50 | 0·20, 0·79 | 0·001 | 0·40 | 0·08, 0·71 | 0·01 |
| Geographical areas | |||||||||
| Northern | 17·3 | −0·09 | 4·88 | Ref. | Ref. | ||||
| Central | 6·7 | −0·53 | 5·47 | −0·38 | −1·03, 0·27 | 0·25 | −0·38 | −1·04, 0·28 | 0·26 |
| Southern and Islands | 74·4 | −0·29 | 3·70 | −1·48 | −1·93, −1·03 | <0·0001 | −1·32 | −1·80, −0·84 | <0·0001 |
| Living area | |||||||||
| ≥200 000 inhabitants | 11·4 | −0·45 | 4·95 | Ref. | Ref. | ||||
| <200 000 inhabitants | 11·9 | −0·51 | 4·88 | −0·09 | −0·68, 0·51 | 0·77 | 0·38 | −0·24, 0·99 | 0·23 |
| <50 000 inhabitants | 54·2 | 0·07 | 0·10 | −0·58 | −1·13, −0·03 | 0·039 | 0·004 | −0·59, 0·60 | 0·99 |
| Villages/rural areas | 22·5 | −0·90 | 5·20 | −1·02 | −1·56, −0·49 | 0·0002 | −0·33 | −0·92, 0·26 | 0·28 |
| Educational level | |||||||||
| Up to lower secondary | 18·5 | −0·04 | 2·56 | Ref. | Ref. | ||||
| Upper secondary | 36·3 | −0·11 | 3·76 | 0·17 | −0·25, 0·59 | 0·43 | −0·06 | −0·53, 0·42 | 0·81 |
| Postgraduate | 45·3 | −0·50 | 4·75 | 0·32 | −0·14, 0·78 | 0·17 | −0·25 | −0·83, 0·33 | 0·41 |
| Household income (EUR/year) | |||||||||
| ≤10 000 | 5·0 | −0·41 | 4·28 | Ref. | Ref. | ||||
| >10 000 ≤ 25 000 | 27·4 | −0·47 | 4·28 | −0·07 | −0·77, 0·62 | 0·83 | −0·27 | −0·97, 0·43 | 0·45 |
| >25 000 ≤ 40 000 | 29·3 | −0·11 | 3·67 | 0·28 | −0·42, 0·98 | 0·43 | −0·05 | −0·78, 0·69 | 0·90 |
| >40 000 ≤ 60 000 | 12·7 | −0·09 | 3·88 | 0·59 | −0·18, 1·35 | 0·13 | 0·15 | −0·67, 0·96 | 0·73 |
| >60 000 | 11·3 | −0·16 | 4·29 | 1·03 | 0·23, 1·83 | 0·01 | 0·44 | −0·42, 1·30 | 0·32 |
| Non respondents | 14·3 | −0·47 | 4·34 | 0·19 | −0·56, 0·94 | 0·62 | −0·08 | −0·85, 0·68 | 0·83 |
| Marital status | |||||||||
| Married/in couple | 73·1 | −0·14 | 3·74 | Ref. | Ref. | ||||
| Unmarried | 15·6 | −0·78 | 5·33 | −0·53 | −1·00, −0·06 | 0·03 | −0·29 | −0·81, 0·22 | 0·27 |
| Divorced | 5·3 | −0·64 | 5·19 | −0·11 | −0·76, 0·54 | 0·74 | −0·01 | −0·69, 0·67 | 0·97 |
| Widower | 6·0 | −0·30 | 2·80 | −0·10 | −0·75, 0·55 | 0·77 | 0·29 | −0·44, 1·01 | 0·44 |
| Number of cohabitants | |||||||||
| None | 10·6 | −0·79 | 4·64 | Ref. | Ref. | ||||
| 1 | 38·5 | −0·12 | 3·32 | 0·47 | −0·03, 0·97 | 0·07 | 0·46 | −0·14, 1·06 | 0·13 |
| 2 | 23·5 | 0·001 | 3·98 | 0·63 | 0·09, 1·17 | 0·02 | 0·69 | 0·05, 1·32 | 0·03 |
| >2 | 27·4 | −0·53 | 4·79 | 0·16 | −0·38, 0·70 | 0·56 | 0·21 | −0·44, 0·86 | 0·54 |
| Occupational class | |||||||||
| Professional/managerial | 43·5 | −0·36 | 4·39 | Ref. | Ref. | ||||
| Skilled non-manual | 30·9 | −0·03 | 3·71 | −0·14 | −0·49, 0·22 | 0·45 | −0·12 | −0·51, 0·27 | 0·55 |
| Skilled manual | 5·0 | −0·25 | 2·82 | −0·55 | −1·25, 0·15 | 0·13 | −0·33 | −1·10, 0·45 | 0·41 |
| Partly skilled/unskilled | 6·2 | −0·11 | 3·18 | −1·50 | −1·14, 0·14 | 0·12 | −0·36 | −1·06, 0·34 | 0·32 |
| Unemployed/unclassified | 14·5 | −0·64 | 4·48 | −0·58 | −1·04, −0·13 | 0·01 | −0·42 | −0·93, 0·09 | 0·10 |
Numbers do not add up to 100 % due to missing data.
Unadjusted means.
Multivariable-adjusted linear regression including cohort, age groups and sex.
Multivariable-adjusted linear regression including cohort, age groups, sex, geographical area, living area, educational level, household income, marital status, number of cohabitants and occupational class.
Association of lockdown-induced factors with self-rated changes in ultra-processed food (UPF) consumption during the Italian lockdown following the COVID-19 pandemic (9 March – 3 May 2020) by means of adjusted regression coefficients (β) with 95 % CI and P-value, Italy 2020
| % | UPF score mean |
|
| 95 % CI |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Work type during lockdown | ||||||
| Usual working | 15·4 | −0·44 | 4·64 | Ref. | ||
| Smart/home working | 23·4 | −0·33 | 4·78 | −0·001 | −0·47, 0·47 | 1·00 |
| Work interruption | 9·3 | −0·97 | 5·40 | −0·53 | −1·14, 0·08 | 0·09 |
| Work reduction | 4·7 | −0·27 | 5·63 | 0·38 | −0·37, 1·14 | 0·32 |
| Job loss | 1·0 | 0·07 | 5·22 | 0·56 | −0·95, 2·08 | 0·47 |
| Retired/housewife | 42·6 | −0·07 | 2·54 | 0·03 | −0·55, 0·62 | 0·91 |
| Income support | ||||||
| No | 75·9 | −0·23 | 3·71 | Ref. | ||
| Yes | 24·1 | −0·44 | 5·04 | 0·04 | −0·33, 0·40 | 0·84 |
| Income reduction | ||||||
| No | 66·7 | −0·04 | 3·33 | Ref. | ||
| Yes | 25·8 | −0·64 | 5·26 | −0·35 | −0·72, 0·01 | 0·06 |
| Physical exercise during lockdown | ||||||
| Unchanged | 31·5 | −0·10 | 3·40 | Ref. | ||
| Increased | 9·2 | −1·30 | 4·91 | −0·90 | −1·46, −0·35 | 0·001 |
| Decreased | 49·6 | −0·33 | 4·49 | −0·22 | −0·55, 0·11 | 0·18 |
| Smoking habit during lockdown | ||||||
| Unchanged | 90·1 | −0·28 | 3·94 | Ref. | ||
| Increased | 5·3 | 0·07 | 4·94 | 0·75 | 0·10, 1·39 | 0·023 |
| Decreased | 4·6 | −0·56 | 5·39 | 0·09 | −0·60, 0·78 | 0·81 |
| Diagnosis of chronic diseases during lockdown | ||||||
| No | 95·2 | −0·26 | 4·00 | Ref. | ||
| Yes | 4·2 | −0·26 | 5·19 | 0·65 | −0·07, 1·37 | 0·08 |
| Drug use during lockdown | ||||||
| No | 96·1 | −0·26 | 4·00 | Ref. | ||
| Yes | 3·4 | −0·83 | 5·91 | 0·04 | −0·75, 0·83 | 0·92 |
| UPF consumption at baseline | ||||||
| Low | 33·1 | 0·17 | 1·38 | Ref. | ||
| Average | 33·7 | 0·51 | 1·58 | 0·25 | 0·06, 0·45 | 0·01 |
| High | 33·2 | 0·24 | 1·67 | −0·04 | −0·24, 0·15 | 0·68 |
Numbers do not add up to 100 % due to missing data.
Unadjusted means.
Multivariable-adjusted linear regression including cohort, age groups, sex, geographical area, living area, number of cohabitants and occupational class.
Calculated among Moli-LOCK participants only (n 1501) and obtained from the multivariable linear regression including age, sex, household income, marital status and occupational class.
Association of diet-related behaviours with self-rated changes in ultra-processed food (UPF) consumption during the Italian lockdown following the COVID-19 pandemic (9 March – 3 May 2020) by means of adjusted regression coefficients (β) with 95 % CI and P-value, Italy 2020
| % | UPF score mean |
|
| 95 % CI |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Body weight | ||||||
| Unchanged | 50·0 | −0·63 | 3·62 | Ref. | ||
| Increased | 37·6 | 0·65 | 4·16 | 1·33 | 1·03, 1·64 | <0·0001 |
| Decreased | 11·4 | −1·66 | 5·48 | −1·05 | −1·51, −0·59 | <0·0001 |
| Take away food | ||||||
| Unchanged | 75·9 | −0·13 | 3·44 | Ref. | ||
| Increased | 11·6 | 0·47 | 5·31 | 0·78 | 0·31, 1·25 | 0·001 |
| Reduced | 11·6 | −1·75 | 5·51 | −1·24 | −1·72, −0·76 | <0·0001 |
| Time spent on home food preparation | ||||||
| Unchanged | 49·1 | −0·50 | 3·59 | Ref. | ||
| Increased | 48·6 | −0·002 | 4·42 | 0·69 | 0·39, 0·99 | <0·0001 |
| Reduced | 1·6 | −1·38 | 5·40 | −0·58 | −1·72, 0·57 | 0·32 |
| Number of daily meals | ||||||
| Unchanged | 79·7 | −0·57 | 3·71 | Ref. | ||
| Increased | 17·6 | 1·28 | 5·00 | 2·15 | 1·77, 2·52 | <0·0001 |
| Reduced | 2·4 | −1·85 | 5·04 | −1·20 | −2·12, −0·27 | 0·01 |
| Food supplements use | ||||||
| Unchanged | 90·6 | −0·21 | 3·82 | Ref. | ||
| Increased | 6·8 | −0·88 | 5·48 | −0·23 | −0·81, 0·36 | 0·45 |
| Reduced | 1·2 | −1·00 | 7·64 | −0·38 | −1·68, 0·91 | 0·56 |
| Water intake | ||||||
| Unchanged | 79·6 | −0·21 | 3·49 | Ref. | ||
| Increased | 17·2 | −0·56 | 5·86 | −0·01 | −0·39, 0·41 | 0·95 |
| Reduced | 2·8 | −0·64 | 5·67 | −0·25 | −1·13, 0·64 | 0·59 |
| Food budget | ||||||
| Unchanged | 55·7 | −0·42 | 3·45 | Ref. | ||
| Increased | 30·4 | 0·07 | 4·90 | 0·74 | 0·40, 1·08 | <0·0001 |
| Reduced | 12·9 | −0·48 | 4·37 | 0·02 | −0·42, 0·46 | 0·93 |
| Short food supply chain | ||||||
| Unchanged | 56·1 | −0·21 | 3·40 | Ref. | ||
| Increased | 33·2 | −0·40 | 4·83 | 0·25 | −0·08, 0·57 | 0·14 |
| Reduced | 9·6 | −0·09 | 4·74 | 0·26 | −0·25, 0·76 | 0·32 |
| Long food supply chain | ||||||
| Unchanged | 54·7 | −0·24 | 3·20 | Ref. | ||
| Increased | 17·7 | −0·01 | 5·47 | 0·62 | 0·22, 1·03 | 0·003 |
| Reduced | 26·5 | −0·52 | 4·55 | 0·09 | −0·26, 0·44 | 0·61 |
| Organic food | ||||||
| Unchanged | 91·4 | −0·14 | 3·77 | Ref. | ||
| Increased | 5·2 | −1·72 | 6·77 | −1·16 | −1·82, −0·50 | 0·0005 |
| Reduced | 1·6 | −2·15 | 5·84 | −1·68 | −2·83, −0·52 | 0·005 |
| Local food | ||||||
| Unchanged | 78·9 | −0·13 | 3·69 | Ref. | ||
| Increased | 14·7 | −1·09 | 5·36 | −0·54 | −0·96, −0·12 | 0·01 |
| Reduced | 5·0 | 0·00 | 4·79 | 0·11 | −0·55, 0·76 | 0·75 |
| Pre-prepared meals | ||||||
| Unchanged | 82·1 | 0·18 | 3·10 | Ref. | ||
| Increased | 5·2 | 2·08 | 4·79 | 1·84 | 1·23, 2·46 | <0·0001 |
| Reduced | 11·6 | −4·22 | 6·39 | −4·18 | −4·63, −3·73 | <0·0001 |
| Long shelf life food | ||||||
| Unchanged | 79·1 | −0·05 | 3·20 | Ref. | ||
| Increased | 13·8 | 0·97 | 5·14 | 1·20 | 0·80, 1·60 | <0·0001 |
| Reduced | 6·2 | −5·64 | 6·30 | −5·12 | −5·70, −4·54 | <0·0001 |
Numbers do not add up to 100 % due to missing data.
Unadjusted means.
Multivariable-adjusted linear regression including cohort, age groups, sex, geographical area, living area, number of cohabitants and occupational class.
Fig. 3Changes in diet-related behaviours during the Italian lockdown (9 March – 3 May 2020). Radar plots show changes in consumption (increase/decrease) of each diet-related behaviour along a vertical axis starting in the centre of the circle (0 % change)