Dutch food bank recipients have poorer dietary intakes than the general and low-socioeconomic status Dutch adult population.

PURPOSE: Food-assistance program users are a specific group of nutritional concern, as they are often food insufficient and have poorer diet quality compared to non-food-assistance program users. The aim of our study was to assess dietary intake of Dutch food bank recipients (n = 167) and to compare this with dietary intake of a representative sample of the general population (Dutch National Food Consumption Survey (DNFCS-all): n = 1933), including a low-socioeconomic status (SES) sample (DNFCS-low SES: n = 312), using data from the DNFCS 2007-2010. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 12 food banks throughout The Netherlands participated. Food bank recipients' characteristics were assessed with a self-administered questionnaire. Dietary intake data were collected through three 24-h recalls. Habitual dietary intake (mean, percentiles, and 95% CI) was estimated for all samples. Differences between samples were determined by comparing the 95% CIs. RESULTS: Mean age of the study population (62.9% female) was 48.6 years (SD:10.1). Mean energy intake was 1986 (95% CI 1830-2089) kcal. The majority of the Dutch food bank recipients had lower intakes than dietary reference intakes for dietary fiber, fruit, vegetables, and fish (range 86.6-99.3%), and a higher intake for saturated fat [88.1% (95% CI 84.1-98.9)]. Furthermore, mean intakes of energy, fiber, fruit, and vegetables were significantly lower in Dutch food bank recipients than in the DNFCS-all and the DNFCS-low-SES [e.g., daily mean fruit intake (g) food bank recipients 62.8 (95% CI 45.5-76.5), DNFCS-all 105.8 (95% CI 105.4-117.9), and DNFCS-low-SES 85.1 (95% CI 78.7-100.2)]. Fish intake was significantly lower compared with the DNFCS-all, but not compared with the DNFCS-low-SES. CONCLUSIONS: Dutch food bank recipients, who largely rely on the content of food parcels, are not able to meet the nutritional guidelines for a healthy diet, and their dietary intake is poorer than the general as well as the low-SES sample of the Dutch adult population. More research is needed on how to improve the dietary intake of this vulnerable population subgroup, by, e.g., revising the content of the food parcels, and to develop effective intervention activities.

Misperception of self-reported adherence to the fruit, vegetable and fish guidelines in older Dutch adults.

In this study we investigated (the degree of) misperception of adherence to the fruit, vegetable and fish guidelines in older Dutch adults and examined to what extent misperception is associated with socio-economic position (SEP) and other demographic, lifestyle and nutrition-related characteristics. The sample included 1057 community dwelling adults, aged 55-85 years, who participated in the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam. Respondents completed a lifestyle questionnaire which included a food frequency questionnaire to calculate fruit, vegetable and fish intake. After current dietary guidelines were explained, respondents were asked to indicate whether they believed they adhered to the fruit, vegetable and fish guidelines. Characteristics potentially associated with misperception included level of income and education, lifestyle factors, nutritional knowledge, as well as attitude, social support and self-efficacy toward healthy eating. In the total sample, 69.1% of the older adults reported to adhere to the fruit guideline, 77.5% to the vegetable guideline, and 36.4% to the fish guideline. Based on the calculated intake data, 82.6% adhered to the fruit guideline, 65.5% to the vegetable guideline and 33.8% to the fish guideline. Overestimation of adherence was most common for the vegetable guideline (18.7%). Multivariate analysis, adjusted for level of income as well as for attitude and self-efficacy toward healthy eating, showed that lower educated respondents were more likely to overestimate their adherence to the vegetable guideline (relative index of inequality (RII): 2.97 (95% CI: 1.47-6.01)). Overestimation rates for fish (3.4%) and fruit (2.3%) were lower and not associated with any of the characteristics. This study showed that overestimation in older adults was common for adherence to the vegetable guideline and especially in those with a lower education level, but not for adherence to the fruit and fish guideline.

Adherence to dietary guidelines for fruit, vegetables and fish among older Dutch adults; the role of education, income and job prestige.

OBJECTIVES: Little is known about socio-economic differences in dietary intake among older adults. In this study we describe self-reported dietary adherence to the fruit, vegetables and fish guidelines among older Dutch adults and investigate the independent associations of three socio-economic status (SES) indicators with adherence to these guidelines. DESIGN: Cross sectional data-analyses. SETTINGS: The Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam (LASA), the Netherlands. SUBJECTS: 1057 community dwelling older adults, aged 55-85 years. MEASUREMENTS: Fruit, vegetable and fish intake was assessed using a short food frequency questionnaire. We measured SES using self-reported levels of education, household income and occupational prestige. RESULTS: 82.5% of the respondents reported to adhere to the fruit guideline, 65.1% to the vegetables guideline, and 31.7% to the fish guideline. After adjustment for confounders and the other two SES indicators, respondents in the lowest education group adhered less often to the vegetables guideline (OR 0.39 (95% CI 0.22-0.70)) compared to those in the highest education group. Respondents in the lowest income group adhered less often to the fruit (0.44 (95 % CI 0.22-0.91) and fish guideline (OR 0.55 (95% CI 0.33-0.91) compared to those in the highest groups. Occupational prestige was not independently associated with adherence any the guidelines. CONCLUSION: Self-reported adherence to the fruit, vegetables and fish guidelines among older adults can be improved and particularly in those with a low SES. Education and income have independent and unique contributions to dietary adherence. Future research should investigate potential pathways through which these specific SES indicators influence dietary adherence.