Seguridad alimentaria: un método alterno frente a uno clásico / Household food security: comparing an alternative method to a classical one

RESUMEN

Objetivos Evaluar durante 2007-2008 el desempeño la Escala de Percepción de Seguridad Alimentaria (EPSA) frente a la inseguridad alimentaria (IA) determinada con base en la energía usualmente consumida. Métodos Participaron 211 hogares. El responsable de la preparación de los alimentos contestó la EPSA, otro integrante del hogar contestó dos veces un recordatorio del consumo de veinticuatro horas (R24H). El referente fue la IA por el R24H y la prueba la EPSA. Resultados La IA por el R24H fue del 48,8 por ciento, con la EPSA de 19,4 por ciento. La sensibilidad de la EPSA fue de 16,5 por ciento, la especificidad de 77,8 por ciento. El acuerdo según la Kappa fue de -0,06 (IC; -0,20 a -0,03). Conclusiones Bajo el supuesto de equivalencia de métodos, la EPSA subestima la inseguridad alimentaria en el hogar. Los resultados de la EPSA comparados con los del R24H no son coherentes.

ABSTRACT

Objective Establishing the performance of the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) household food security scale (EPSA) which is being used in Latin-America and the Caribbean, compared to a traditionally-used method (food insecurity scale) which has led to establishing food security at individual and population level. The performance of the household food security scale (EPSA) was evaluated during 2007-2008 and compared to that of the food insecurity (FI) scale based on the energy usually consumed. Methods Two hundred and eleven household participated in the study. The person responsible for preparing food in the home answered the EPSA questionnaire. Another household member filled in a form recording the last twenty-four hours' household consumption (R24H) (on two different occasions). The study was validated by food insecurity from R24H and supposed food security from the EPSA questionnaire. Results Food insecurity by R24H was 48.8 percent and 19.4 percent on the EPSA. The EPSA had 16.5 percent sensitivity and 77.8 percent specificity. Agreement between both methods according to Cohen's Kappa was -0.06 (-0.20-0.03 CI). Conclusion Assuming equivalence of methods, the EPSA greatly underestimated household food insecurity. The EPSA results compared to those arising from the R24H were not very coherent. Some implications are discussed regarding related public policy.