An adequate protein intake is important for healthy ageing, yet nearly 50% of Dutch community-dwelling older adults do not meet protein recommendations. This study explores protein intake in relation to eight behavioral determinants (I-Change model) among Dutch community-dwelling older adults. Data were collected through an online questionnaire from October 2019–October 2020. Protein intake was assessed by the Protein Screener 55+, indicating a high/low chance of a low protein intake (<1.0 g/kg body weight/day). The behavioral determinants of cognizance, knowledge, risk perception, perceived cues, attitude, social support, self-efficacy and intention were assessed by evaluating statements on a 7-point Likert scale. A total of 824 Dutch community-dwelling older adults were included, recruited via online newsletters, newspapers and by personal approach. Poisson regression was performed to calculate quartile-based prevalence ratios (PRs). Almost 40% of 824 respondents had a high chance of a low protein intake. Univariate analyses indicated that lower scores for all different behavioral determinants were associated with a higher chance of a low protein intake. Independent associations were observed for knowledge (Q4 OR = 0.71) and social support (Q4 OR = 0.71). Results of this study can be used in future interventions aiming to increase protein intake in which focus should lie on increasing knowledge and social support.
LINK
Background/purpose: For prevention of sarcopenia and functionaldecline in community-dwelling older adults, a higher daily proteinintake is needed. A new e-health strategy for dietary counselling wasused with the aim to increase total daily protein intake to optimallevels (minimal 1.2 g/kg/day, optimal 1.5 g/kg/day) through use ofregular food products.Methods: The VITAMIN (VITal Amsterdam older adults IN the city)RCT included 245 community-dwelling older adults (age ≥ 55y):control, exercise, and exercise plus dietary counselling (protein)group. The dietary counselling intervention was based on behaviourchange and personalization. Dietary intake was measured by a 3ddietary record at baseline, after 6-month intervention and 12-monthfollow-up. The primary outcome was average daily protein intake(g/kg/day). Sub-group analysis and secondary outcomes includeddaily protein distribution, sources, product groups. A Linear MixedModels (LMM) of repeated measures was performed with STATAv13.Results: Mean age of the 224 subjects was 72.0(6.5) years, a BMI of26.0(4.2). The LMM showed a significant effect of time and time*group(p<0.001). The dietary counselling group showed higher protein intakethan either control (1.41 vs 1.13 g/kg/day; β +0.32; p<0.001) or exercisegroup (1.41 vs 1.11 g/kg/day; β +0.33; p<0.001) after 6-month interventionand 12-month follow-up.Conclusions and implications: This study shows digitally supporteddietary counselling improves protein intake sufficiently in communitydwellingolder adults with use of regular food products. Protein intakeincrease by personalised counselling with e-health is a promising strategyfor dieticians.
Background: In frail older people with natural teeth factors like polypharmacy, reduced salivary flow, a decrease of oral self-care, general healthcare issues, and a decrease in dental care utilization contribute to an increased risk for oral complications. On the other hand, oral morbidity may have a negative impact on frailty. Objective: This study explored associations between oral health and two frailty measures in community-dwelling older people. Design: A cross-sectional study. Setting: The study was carried out in a Primary Healthcare Center (PHC) in The Netherlands. Participants: Of the 5,816 persons registered in the PHC, 1,814 persons were eligible for participation at the start of the study. Measurements: Two frailty measures were used: 1. Being at risk for frailty, using Electronical Medical Record (EMR) data, and: 2. Survey-based frailty using ‘The Groningen Frailty Indicator’ (GFI). For oral health measures, dental-record data (dental care utilization, dental status, and oral health information) and self-reported oral problems were recorded. Univariate regression analyses were applied to determine the association between oral health and frailty, followed by age- and sex-adjusted multivariate logistic regressions. Results: In total 1,202 community-dwelling older people were included in the study, 45% were male and the mean age was 73 years (SD=8). Of all participants, 53% was at risk for frailty (638/1,202), and 19% was frail based on the GFI (222/1,202). A dental emergency visit (Odds Ratio (OR)= 2.0, 95% Confidence Interval (CI)=1.33;3.02 and OR=1.58, 95% CI=1.00;2.49), experiencing oral problems (OR=2.07, 95% CI=1.52;2.81 and OR=2.87, 95% CI= 2.07;3.99), and making dietary adaptations (OR=2.66, 95% CI=1.31;5.41 and OR=5.49, 95% CI= 3.01;10.01) were associated with being at risk for frailty and surveybased frailty respectively. Conclusions: A dental emergency visit and self-reported oral health problems are associated with frailty irrespective of the approach to its measurement. Healthcare professionals should be aware of the associations of oral health and frailty in daily practice.
