2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Impact of food-based fortification on nutritional outcomes and acceptability in older adults: systematic literature review

      systematic-review

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          “Do it yourself” (DIY) food-based fortification involves adding fortificants into everyday foods. It is a flexible solution that allows older people with reduced appetite to meet their nutritional needs.

          Objectives

          The aims of the systematic review are (a) to describe DIY fortified recipes, (b) to evaluate their acceptability, and (c) to evaluate whether they are effective levers to improve nutritional outcomes in older people.

          Methods

          A systematic search of 3 databases (Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, last searched on January 2022) was undertaken. Main eligibility criteria include older adults aged ≥60 years living at home, in an institution or in hospital. Studies carried out for a specific medical condition or targeting only micronutrient fortification were excluded. After reviewing all titles/abstracts then full-text papers, key data were extracted and synthesized narratively. The quality of included studies was assessed using Kmet et al.

          Results

          Of 21,493 papers extracted, 44 original studies were included (3,384 participants), with 31 reporting nutritional outcomes, 3 reporting acceptability outcomes and 10 reporting both nutritional and acceptability outcomes. The review highlighted a wide variety of DIY fortified recipes, with additional energy ranging from 23 to 850 kcal/d ( M = 403; SE = 62) and/or protein ranging from 4 to 40 g/d ( M = 19; SE = 2). Compared to a standard diet, DIY fortification seems to be a valuable strategy for increasing energy and protein intake in older people. However, no strong evidence was observed on the nutritional status.

          Implication for future

          Further acceptability studies are crucial to ensure that DIY fortified foods are palatable and thus have a significant impact on the nutritional status. In addition, it would be useful for studies to better describe DIY recipes. This information would result in a better understanding of the factors that maximize the impact of DIY fortification on nutritional outcomes. Study registration: PROSPERO no. CRD42021244689.

          Systematic review registration: PROSPERO: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021244689.

          Related collections

          Most cited references82

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found
            Is Open Access

            Evidence-based recommendations for optimal dietary protein intake in older people: a position paper from the PROT-AGE Study Group.

            New evidence shows that older adults need more dietary protein than do younger adults to support good health, promote recovery from illness, and maintain functionality. Older people need to make up for age-related changes in protein metabolism, such as high splanchnic extraction and declining anabolic responses to ingested protein. They also need more protein to offset inflammatory and catabolic conditions associated with chronic and acute diseases that occur commonly with aging. With the goal of developing updated, evidence-based recommendations for optimal protein intake by older people, the European Union Geriatric Medicine Society (EUGMS), in cooperation with other scientific organizations, appointed an international study group to review dietary protein needs with aging (PROT-AGE Study Group). To help older people (>65 years) maintain and regain lean body mass and function, the PROT-AGE study group recommends average daily intake at least in the range of 1.0 to 1.2 g protein per kilogram of body weight per day. Both endurance- and resistance-type exercises are recommended at individualized levels that are safe and tolerated, and higher protein intake (ie, ≥ 1.2 g/kg body weight/d) is advised for those who are exercising and otherwise active. Most older adults who have acute or chronic diseases need even more dietary protein (ie, 1.2-1.5 g/kg body weight/d). Older people with severe kidney disease (ie, estimated GFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m(2)), but who are not on dialysis, are an exception to this rule; these individuals may need to limit protein intake. Protein quality, timing of ingestion, and intake of other nutritional supplements may be relevant, but evidence is not yet sufficient to support specific recommendations. Older people are vulnerable to losses in physical function capacity, and such losses predict loss of independence, falls, and even mortality. Thus, future studies aimed at pinpointing optimal protein intake in specific populations of older people need to include measures of physical function. Copyright © 2013 American Medical Directors Association, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Protein intake and exercise for optimal muscle function with aging: recommendations from the ESPEN Expert Group.

              The aging process is associated with gradual and progressive loss of muscle mass along with lowered strength and physical endurance. This condition, sarcopenia, has been widely observed with aging in sedentary adults. Regular aerobic and resistance exercise programs have been shown to counteract most aspects of sarcopenia. In addition, good nutrition, especially adequate protein and energy intake, can help limit and treat age-related declines in muscle mass, strength, and functional abilities. Protein nutrition in combination with exercise is considered optimal for maintaining muscle function. With the goal of providing recommendations for health care professionals to help older adults sustain muscle strength and function into older age, the European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) hosted a Workshop on Protein Requirements in the Elderly, held in Dubrovnik on November 24 and 25, 2013. Based on the evidence presented and discussed, the following recommendations are made (a) for healthy older people, the diet should provide at least 1.0-1.2 g protein/kg body weight/day, (b) for older people who are malnourished or at risk of malnutrition because they have acute or chronic illness, the diet should provide 1.2-1.5 g protein/kg body weight/day, with even higher intake for individuals with severe illness or injury, and (c) daily physical activity or exercise (resistance training, aerobic exercise) should be undertaken by all older people, for as long as possible. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd and European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Nutr
                Front Nutr
                Front. Nutr.
                Frontiers in Nutrition
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                2296-861X
                27 October 2023
                2023
                : 10
                : 1232502
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Centre des Sciences du Goût et de l'Alimentation, CNRS, INRAE, Institut Agro, Université de Bourgogne , Dijon, France
                [2] 2CHU Dijon Bourgogne, Unité de recherche Pôle Personnes Âgées , Dijon, France
                Author notes

                Edited by: Mohammed Youssef, Alexandria University, Egypt

                Reviewed by: Lauren E. O'Connor, United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), United States; Kathleen L. Hefferon, Cornell University, United States; Justin Chileshe, Tropical Diseases Research Centre, Zambia

                *Correspondence: Claire Sulmont-Rossé, claire.sulmont-rosse@ 123456inrae.fr
                Article
                10.3389/fnut.2023.1232502
                10641731
                a6be3ec0-b2a2-4551-8a19-917d74b74978
                Copyright © 2023 Geny, Petitjean, Van Wymelbeke-Delannoy and Sulmont-Rossé.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 31 May 2023
                : 02 October 2023
                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 5, Equations: 0, References: 84, Pages: 24, Words: 14353
                Funding
                This work received funding by the French “Investissements d’Avenir” program, project ISITE-BFC (contract ANR-15-IDEX-0003) and from ANR (ANR-20-HDHL-0003 FORTIPHY), Research Council Norway (RCN 321819), BBSRC (BB/V018329/1) under the umbrella of the European Joint Programming Initiative “A Healthy Diet for a Healthy Life” (JPI HDHL) and of the ERA-NET Cofund ERA-HDHL (GA N°696295 of the EU Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme).
                Categories
                Nutrition
                Systematic Review
                Custom metadata
                Clinical Nutrition

                elderly,enrichment,supplementation,food-first,malnutrition,intake,body weight,acceptability

                Comments

                Comment on this article