| Literature DB >> 34836221 |
Robert Gajda1, Marzena Jeżewska-Zychowicz2, Ewa Raczkowska1.
Abstract
The aim of the study was to assess the diversity of dietary patterns within the elderly, in relation to the region of residence, household structure, and socioeconomic status. The questionnaire was conducted in a group of 427 Polish adults aged 60 and older from June to September 2019. The sample was selected by means of the snowball method in two regions. Principal component analysis (PCA) was used to extract and identify three dietary patterns (factors) from the frequency of eating 32 groups of foods. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine the relationship between the identified dietary patterns (DPs), region, household status, and socioeconomic index (SES). Adherence to the identified DPs, i.e., traditional, prudent, and adverse, was associated with socioeconomic status (SES) and living environment, i.e., living alone, with partner, or with family, while the region did not differentiate them. Less people living with their family were characterized by the frequent consumption of traditional food (the upper tertile of this DP), while more of them often consumed food that was typical for both prudent and adverse DPs (the upper tertiles of these DPs). The presence of a partner when living with family did not differentiate the adherence to DPs. A high SES decreased the chances of adhering to the upper tertiles of the "prudent" and "traditional" DPs, while living with family increased the chances of adhering to both the upper and middle tertiles of the "prudent" DP. Identifying the dietary patterns of the elderly contributes to a better understanding of the food intake of the senior citizens living in different social situations, in order to support public policies and nutritional counseling among this age group.Entities:
Keywords: dietary patterns; family; region; socio-economic status; the elderly
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34836221 PMCID: PMC8622733 DOI: 10.3390/nu13113966
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Study sample characteristics.
| Variables | (%) | |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | ||
| Female | 289 | 66.1 |
| Male | 148 | 33.9 |
| Age | ||
| 60–74 years old | 331 | 75.7 |
| 75 years old or more | 106 | 24.3 |
| Place of residence | ||
| Rural area | 202 | 46.2 |
| City ≤ 100,000 residents | 89 | 20.4 |
| City > 100,000 residents | 146 | 33.4 |
| Region | ||
| Śląskie/Dolnośląskie | 251 | 57.5 |
| Świętokrzyskie | 186 | 42.5 |
| Household structure | ||
| Living alone | 67 | 15.3 |
| Living with a partner | 190 | 43.5 |
| Living without a partner but with my family | 61 | 14.0 |
| Living with a partner and my family | 119 | 27.2 |
| SES index | ||
| Low | 145 | 33.2 |
| Medium | 154 | 35.2 |
| High | 138 | 31.6 |
Factor-loading matrix for the dietary patterns identified using Varimax rotation.
| Food Groups | Factor 1 | Factor 2 | Factor 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Traditional” DP | “Prudent” DP | “Adverse” DP | |
| White bread and bakery products, e.g., wheat bread, rye bread, wheat/rye bread, toast bread, bread rolls | 0.638 | −0.096 | 0.075 |
| Fried foods (e.g., meat or flour-based foods, such as dumplings, pancakes, etc.) | 0.555 | −0.016 | 0.443 |
| Cold meats, smoked sausages, hot dogs | 0.595 | 0.100 | 0.225 |
| Potatoes (excluding chips and crisps) | 0.528 | 0.073 | 0.030 |
| Buckwheat, oats, wholegrain pasta or other coarse-ground groats | −0.288 | 0.519 | 0.126 |
| Fermented milk beverages, e.g., yoghurts, kefir (natural or flavoured) | −0.038 | 0.689 | 0.131 |
| Fresh cheese curd products, e.g., cottage cheese, homogenized cheese, fromage frais | −0.012 | 0.593 | 0.022 |
| Fruit | 0.120 | 0.633 | −0.296 |
| Vegetables | 0.185 | 0.660 | −0.293 |
| Vegetable juices or fruit and vegetable juice | −0.156 | 0.556 | 0.329 |
| Water, e.g., mineral, tap water | −0.084 | 0.517 | −0.106 |
| Sweetened carbonated or still beverages, such as Coca-Cola, Pepsi, Sprite, Fanta, lemonade | 0.095 | −0.046 | 0.539 |
| Energy drinks, such as Red Bull, Monster, Rockstar, or other | −0.033 | 0.055 | 0.585 |
| Instant soups or ready-made soups, e.g., tinned, jar, concentrates (excluding frozen soup mixes) | 0.195 | 0.004 | 0.619 |
| Tinned (jar) meats | 0.238 | −0.016 | 0.643 |
| Lard as a bread spread, or as an addition to meals/for frying/for baking, etc. | 0.218 | 0.031 | 0.578 |
| Vegetable oils or margarines or mixes of butter and margarines as a bread spread, or as an addition to meals/for frying/for baking | 0.480 | −0.074 | 0.080 |
| Cheese (including processed cheese, blue cheese) | 0.407 | 0.334 | 0.195 |
| White meat, e.g., chicken, turkey, rabbit | 0.423 | 0.391 | 0.138 |
| Sweets, e.g., confectionary, biscuits, cakes, chocolate bars, cereal bars, other | 0.496 | −0.015 | 0.157 |
| Wholemeal bread | −0.409 | 0.434 | 0.058 |
| Milk (including flavoured milk, hot chocolate, latte) | 0.203 | 0.457 | 0.186 |
| Fish | −0.158 | 0.407 | 0.290 |
| Eggs | 0.096 | 0.429 | 0.229 |
| Fruit juices | 0.040 | 0.451 | 0.351 |
| Fast foods, e.g., potato chips, hamburgers, pizza, hot dogs | −0.016 | 0.029 | 0.480 |
| White rice, white pasta, fine-ground groats, e.g., semolina, couscous | 0.182 | 0.303 | 0.231 |
| Butter as a bread spread or as an addition to meals/for frying/for baking, etc. | 0.345 | 0.106 | 0.035 |
| Red meat, e.g., pork, beef, veal, mutton, lamb, game | 0.353 | 0.063 | 0.316 |
| Pulse-based foods, e.g., from beans, peas, soybeans, lentils | −0.336 | 0.356 | 0.139 |
| Sweetened hot beverages, such as black tea, coffee, herbal or fruit teas | 0.279 | 0.027 | 0.094 |
| Tinned (jar) vegetables, e.g., pickles | 0.157 | 0.258 | 0.315 |
| Variance explained (%) | 11.4 | 15.3 | 6.2 |
| Total variance explained (%) | 32.9 | ||
| Kaiser’s measure of sampling adequacy | 0.798 | ||
Associations between dietary patterns and region, household status and SES index in the total sample (%).
| Variables | “Traditional” DP a,* | “Prudent” DP b,* | “Adverse” DP c,* | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bottom Tertile | Middle Tertile | Upper Tertile | Bottom Tertile | Middle Tertile | Upper Tertile | Bottom Tertile | Middle Tertile | Upper Tertile | |
| Total sample | 145 (33.2) | 147 (33.6) | 145 (33.2) | 146 (33.4) | 145 (33.2) | 146 (33.4) | 145 (33.2) | 146 (33.4) | 146 (33.4) |
| Region | |||||||||
| Śląskie/Dolnośląskie | 29.9 | 36.7 | 33.4 | 33.1 | 33.5 | 33.4 | 32.7 | 35.5 | 31.8 |
| Świętokrzyskie | 37.6 | 29.6 | 32.8 | 33.9 | 32.8 | 33.3 | 33.9 | 30.6 | 35.5 |
| Household structure | |||||||||
| Living alone | 28.4 | 29.9 | 41.7 | 37.3 | 32.8 | 29.9 | 37.3 | 38.8 | 23.9 |
| Living with a partner | 30.5 | 35.8 | 33.7 | 37.4 | 35.3 | 27.3 | 32.6 | 32.1 | 35.3 |
| Living without a partner, but with my family a,b,c,* | 36.1 | 36.1 | 27.8 | 31.1 | 29.5 | 39.4 | 29.5 | 34.4 | 36.1 |
| Living with a partner and with my family a,b,c,* | 38.7 | 31.1 | 30.2 | 26.1 | 31.9 | 42.0 | 33.6 | 31.9 | 34.5 |
| SES index | |||||||||
| Low | 31.8 | 21.9 | 44.7 | 26.3 | 23.7 | 50.0 | 36.8 | 30.7 | 32.5 |
| Medium | 27.2 | 41.3 | 31.5 | 26.1 | 39.7 | 34.2 | 32.6 | 35.9 | 31.5 |
| High a,b,c,* | 41.0 | 33.1 | 25.9 | 48.9 | 32.4 | 18.7 | 30.9 | 32.4 | 36.7 |
| SES variables | |||||||||
| Self-reported financial situation | |||||||||
| Below average a,b,* | 4.5 | 8.3 | 8.8 | 6.5 | 7.8 | 8.3 | 10.3 | 11.7 | 9.6 |
| Average | 74.0 | 77.8 | 80.6 | 72.9 | 81.8 | 78.6 | 81.5 | 74.5 | 76.0 |
| Above average a,b,c,* | 21.5 | 13.9 | 10.6 | 20.6 | 10.4 | 13.1 | 8.2 | 13.8 | 14.4 |
| Family financial assistance | |||||||||
| No, although I have financial problems a,b,c,* | 8.9 | 10.3 | 5.4 | 11.0 | 8.8 | 6.9 | 11.0 | 10.3 | 6.8 |
| Yes, because I have financial problems | 6.4 | 7.6 | 2.7 | 9.0 | 6.2 | 4.8 | 8.2 | 7.6 | 11.0 |
| There is no such need because my financial situation is satisfactory | 76.7 | 71.0 | 83.7 | 75.2 | 74.7 | 80.0 | 75.3 | 72.4 | 77.4 |
| Yes, although I have no financial problems a,b,c,* | 8.0 | 11.1 | 8.2 | 4.8 | 10.3 | 8.3 | 5.5 | 9.7 | 4.8 |
| Social financial assistance | |||||||||
| No, although I have financial problems a,b,* | 12.1 | 15.2 | 5.4 | 15.2 | 6.9 | 8.9 | 20.5 | 14.5 | 14.4 |
| Yes, because I have financial problems | 1.6 | 3.4 | 0.0 | 1.4 | 2.1 | 1.4 | 1.4 | 1.4 | 2.1 |
| There is no such need because my financial situation is satisfactory | 85.6 | 80.0 | 93.9 | 82.8 | 90.3 | 89.0 | 77.4 | 82.1 | 83.5 |
| Yes, although I have no financial problems c,* | 0.7 | 1.4 | 0.7 | 0.0 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 2.0 | 0.0 |
| Education | |||||||||
| Primary a,b,c,* | 10.0 | 15.9 | 9.5 | 22.8 | 18.4 | 9.7 | 19.2 | 20.8 | 8.2 |
| Vocational | 34.7 | 38.6 | 40.8 | 26.2 | 28.1 | 33.8 | 43.8 | 29.7 | 37.5 |
| Secondary | 32.5 | 27.6 | 35.4 | 34.5 | 37.0 | 38.6 | 31.5 | 31.7 | 32.9 |
| Higher education a,b,c,* | 22.8 | 17.9 | 14.3 | 30.1 | 16.5 | 17.9 | 5.5 | 17.8 | 21.4 |
a—statistical differences for the “traditional” DP; b—statistical differences for the “prudent” DP, c—statistical differences for the “adverse” DP; chi-square test, * p < 0.05.
Associations between dietary patterns and region, household structures and SES index in the study sample (adjusted odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals).
| Variables | “Traditional” DP | “Prudent” DP | “Adverse” DP | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Ref. Bottom Tertile) | (Ref. Bottom Tertile) | (Ref. Bottom Tertile) | ||||
| Upper Tertile |
| Upper Tertile |
| Upper Tertile |
| |
| Region (ref. Świętokrzyskie) | 0.88 (0.70–1.11) | 0.2898 | 0.99 (0.78–1.25) | 0.9062 | 1.03 (0.82–1.31) | 0.7626 |
| Household structure | ||||||
| Living with partner (ref. living alone) | 0.74 (0.38–1.48) | 0.4058 | 0.91 (0.46–1.83) | 0.8014 | 1.68 (0.82–3.47) | 0.1517 |
| Living without a partner, but with my family (ref. living alone) | 0.52 (0.22–1.26) | 0.1413 | 1.58 (0.67–3.70) | 0.0287 | 1.90 (0.78–4.69) | 0.1515 |
| Living with a partner and with my family (ref. living alone) | 0.53 (0.25–1.11) | 0.0883 | 2.02 (0.96–4.25) | 0.0063 | 1.60 (0.74–3.46) | 0.2268 |
| SES index | ||||||
| Medium SES (ref. low SES) | 0.92 (0.70–1.24) | 0.6130 | 0.83 (0.62–1.12) | 0.2113 | 1.05 (0.79–1.40) | 0.7496 |
| High SES (ref. low SES) | 0.68 (0.51–0.92) | 0.0125 | 0.44 (0.33–0.62) | <0.0001 | 1.16 (0.86–1.57) | 0.3314 |
p—significance level of the Wald’s test.