Food consumption patterns and Framingham cardiovascular risk score among shift workers: A Nova-based approach.

IF 2.9 Q3 NUTRITION & DIETETICS
Andressa Santana Serra Silva, Silvana Mara Luz Turbino Ribeiro, Sílvia Nascimento de Freitas, Fausto Aloisio Pedrosa Pimenta, George Luiz Lins Machado-Coelho, Fernando Luiz Pereira de Oliveira, Raimundo Marques do Nascimento Neto, Luiz Antônio Alves de Menezes-Júnior
{"title":"Food consumption patterns and Framingham cardiovascular risk score among shift workers: A Nova-based approach.","authors":"Andressa Santana Serra Silva, Silvana Mara Luz Turbino Ribeiro, Sílvia Nascimento de Freitas, Fausto Aloisio Pedrosa Pimenta, George Luiz Lins Machado-Coelho, Fernando Luiz Pereira de Oliveira, Raimundo Marques do Nascimento Neto, Luiz Antônio Alves de Menezes-Júnior","doi":"10.1016/j.clnesp.2024.11.030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the association between dietary quantity and variety, by extent and purpose of processing, and Framingham cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk score among rotating shift workers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The cross-sectional study included male shift workers. Dietary intake was assessed using a 24-h recall method conducted by trained interviewers. Food items were classified using two approaches: the first was based on the amount of food consumed in each food group. Fruits, vegetables, and legumes (FVL) intake, is classified as recommended at 400 g per day by WHO guidelines. Ultraprocessed foods (UPFs) were analyzed based on tertiles of daily caloric contribution. The second approach, the Nova dietary diversity score (DDS-Nova) assessed the variety of consumed items within each food group, assigning points for each unique item consumed, irrespective of quantity or frequency. The CVD-risk score was evaluated using the Framingham coronary heart disease risk score, categorizing participants as low risk (<5%) or intermediate to high risk (≥5%). Descriptive, univariate, and multivariate logistic regression were used, with adjustments made for age, skin color, schooling, duration of shift work, physical activity, body mass index and total caloric intake.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study involved 213 participants, with an average age of 38.67 years (±6.96), a minimum of 26 and a maximum of 60. The majority (62.4%) were between 30 and 40 years old; 49.3% identified themselves as brown; 56.8% had completed high school; and 79.3% were married. The Framingham CVD-risk score indicated that 56.2% were at low risk (<5%) and 43.7% at intermediate to high risk (≥5%). The average consumption of FVL was 272.32 g (±350.43), with 70.4% meeting the recommendation of ≥400 g/day. Participants consumed an average of 3.46 fresh food items, 3.74 minimally processed food items, 2.54 processed food items and 3.39 ultra-processed food items. In the multivariate model, consuming ≥400 g/day of FVL reduced the likelihood of cardiovascular risk ≥5% by 2.12 times (OR: 0.47; 95%CI: 0.23-0.98). Each additional item of fresh food reduced the risk by 49.2% (OR: 0.67; 95%CI: 1.01-1.66), while each additional item of ultra-processed food increased the risk by 30.0% (OR: 1.30; 95%CI: 0.52-0.87). There was no significant association between the calorie intake of ultra-processed foods and cardiovascular risk.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both adequate consumption of FVL quantity and a greater variety of fresh-foods were associated with a lower chance of CVD-risk, while a higher variety of consumption of UPF items increased this chance.</p>","PeriodicalId":10352,"journal":{"name":"Clinical nutrition ESPEN","volume":" ","pages":"238-245"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical nutrition ESPEN","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnesp.2024.11.030","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the association between dietary quantity and variety, by extent and purpose of processing, and Framingham cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk score among rotating shift workers.

Methods: The cross-sectional study included male shift workers. Dietary intake was assessed using a 24-h recall method conducted by trained interviewers. Food items were classified using two approaches: the first was based on the amount of food consumed in each food group. Fruits, vegetables, and legumes (FVL) intake, is classified as recommended at 400 g per day by WHO guidelines. Ultraprocessed foods (UPFs) were analyzed based on tertiles of daily caloric contribution. The second approach, the Nova dietary diversity score (DDS-Nova) assessed the variety of consumed items within each food group, assigning points for each unique item consumed, irrespective of quantity or frequency. The CVD-risk score was evaluated using the Framingham coronary heart disease risk score, categorizing participants as low risk (<5%) or intermediate to high risk (≥5%). Descriptive, univariate, and multivariate logistic regression were used, with adjustments made for age, skin color, schooling, duration of shift work, physical activity, body mass index and total caloric intake.

Results: The study involved 213 participants, with an average age of 38.67 years (±6.96), a minimum of 26 and a maximum of 60. The majority (62.4%) were between 30 and 40 years old; 49.3% identified themselves as brown; 56.8% had completed high school; and 79.3% were married. The Framingham CVD-risk score indicated that 56.2% were at low risk (<5%) and 43.7% at intermediate to high risk (≥5%). The average consumption of FVL was 272.32 g (±350.43), with 70.4% meeting the recommendation of ≥400 g/day. Participants consumed an average of 3.46 fresh food items, 3.74 minimally processed food items, 2.54 processed food items and 3.39 ultra-processed food items. In the multivariate model, consuming ≥400 g/day of FVL reduced the likelihood of cardiovascular risk ≥5% by 2.12 times (OR: 0.47; 95%CI: 0.23-0.98). Each additional item of fresh food reduced the risk by 49.2% (OR: 0.67; 95%CI: 1.01-1.66), while each additional item of ultra-processed food increased the risk by 30.0% (OR: 1.30; 95%CI: 0.52-0.87). There was no significant association between the calorie intake of ultra-processed foods and cardiovascular risk.

Conclusion: Both adequate consumption of FVL quantity and a greater variety of fresh-foods were associated with a lower chance of CVD-risk, while a higher variety of consumption of UPF items increased this chance.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Clinical nutrition ESPEN
Clinical nutrition ESPEN NUTRITION & DIETETICS-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
3.30%
发文量
512
期刊介绍: Clinical Nutrition ESPEN is an electronic-only journal and is an official publication of the European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN). Nutrition and nutritional care have gained wide clinical and scientific interest during the past decades. The increasing knowledge of metabolic disturbances and nutritional assessment in chronic and acute diseases has stimulated rapid advances in design, development and clinical application of nutritional support. The aims of ESPEN are to encourage the rapid diffusion of knowledge and its application in the field of clinical nutrition and metabolism. Published bimonthly, Clinical Nutrition ESPEN focuses on publishing articles on the relationship between nutrition and disease in the setting of basic science and clinical practice. Clinical Nutrition ESPEN is available to all members of ESPEN and to all subscribers of Clinical Nutrition.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信