Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

The role of perceived barriers in explaining socio-economic status differences in adherence to the fruit, vegetable and fish guidelines in older adults: a mediation study

  • S Coosje Dijkstra (a1), Judith E Neter (a1), Maartje M van Stralen (a1) (a2), Dirk L Knol (a3), Ingeborg A Brouwer (a1), Martijn Huisman (a3) (a4) (a5) and Marjolein Visser (a1) (a3)...

Abstract

Objective

We aimed to identify barriers for meeting the fruit, vegetable and fish guidelines in older Dutch adults and to investigate socio-economic status (SES) differences in these barriers. Furthermore, we examined the mediating role of these barriers in the association between SES and adherence to these guidelines.

Design

Cross-sectional.

Setting

Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam (LASA), the Netherlands.

Subjects

We used data from 1057 community-dwelling adults, aged 55–85 years. SES was measured by level of education and household income. An FFQ was used to assess dietary intake and barriers were measured with a self-reported lifestyle questionnaire.

Results

Overall, 48·9 % of the respondents perceived a barrier to adhere to the fruit guideline, 40·0 % for the vegetable and 51·1 % for the fish guideline. The most frequently perceived barriers to meet the guidelines were the high price of fruit and fish and a poor appetite for vegetables. Lower-SES groups met the guidelines less often and perceived more barriers. The association between income and adherence to the fruit guideline was mediated by ‘perceiving any barrier to meet the fruit guideline’ and the barrier ‘dislike fruit’. The association between income and adherence to the fish guideline was mediated by ‘perceiving any barrier to meet the fish guideline’ and the barrier ‘fish is expensive’.

Conclusions

Perceived barriers for meeting the dietary guidelines are common in older adults, especially in lower-SES groups. These barriers and in particular disliking and cost concerns explained the lower adherence to the guidelines for fruit and fish in lower-income groups in older adults.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      The role of perceived barriers in explaining socio-economic status differences in adherence to the fruit, vegetable and fish guidelines in older adults: a mediation study
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      The role of perceived barriers in explaining socio-economic status differences in adherence to the fruit, vegetable and fish guidelines in older adults: a mediation study
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      The role of perceived barriers in explaining socio-economic status differences in adherence to the fruit, vegetable and fish guidelines in older adults: a mediation study
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

Corresponding author

* Corresponding author: Email coosje.dijkstra@vu.nl

References

Hide All
1. Gallo, V, Mackenbach, JP, Ezzati, M et al. (2012) Social inequalities and mortality in Europe – results from a large multi-national cohort. PLoS One 7, e39013.
2. Huisman, M, Read, S, Towriss, CA et al. (2013) Socioeconomic inequalities in mortality rates in old age in the World Health Organization Europe Region. Epidemiol Rev (Epublication ahead of print version).
3. Anderson, AL, Harris, TB, Tylavsky, FA et al. (2011) Dietary patterns and survival of older adults. J Am Diet Assoc 111, 8491.
4. Zheng, J, Huang, T, Yu, Y et al. (2012) Fish consumption and CHD mortality: an updated meta-analysis of seventeen cohort studies. Public Health Nutr 15, 725737.
5. Bellavia, A, Larsson, S, Bottai, M et al. (2013) Fruit and vegetable consumption and all-cause mortality: a dose–response analysis. Am J Clin Nutr 98, 454459.
6. He, FJ, Nowson, CA, Lucas, M et al. (2007) Increased consumption of fruit and vegetables is related to a reduced risk of coronary heart disease: meta-analysis of cohort studies. J Hum Hypertens 21, 717728.
7. Alinia, S, Hels, O & Tetens, I (2009) The potential association between fruit intake and body weight – a review. Obes Rev 10, 639647.
8. Carter, P, Gray, LJ, Troughton, J et al. (2010) Fruit and vegetable intake and incidence of type 2 diabetes mellitus: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 341, c4229.
9. Romaguera, D, Vergnaud, AC, Peeters, PH et al. (2012) Is concordance with World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research guidelines for cancer prevention related to subsequent risk of cancer? Results from the EPIC study. Am J Clin Nutr 96, 150163.
10. Malon, A, Deschamps, V, Salanave, B et al. (2010) Compliance with French nutrition and health program recommendations is strongly associated with socioeconomic characteristics in the general adult population. J Am Diet Assoc 110, 848856.
11. Giskes, K, Turrell, G, van Lenthe, FJ et al. (2006) A multilevel study of socio-economic inequalities in food choice behaviour and dietary intake among the Dutch population: the GLOBE study. Public Health Nutr 9, 7583.
12. van Rossum, CT, van de Mheen, H, Witteman, JC et al. (2000) Education and nutrient intake in Dutch elderly people. The Rotterdam Study. Eur J Clin Nutr 54, 159165.
13. Dijkstra, SC, Neter, JE, Brouwer, IA et al. (2014) Adherence to dietary guidelines for fruit, vegetables and fish among older Dutch adults; the role of education, income and job prestige. J Nutr Health Aging 18, 115121.
14. Brug, J, de Vet, E, de Nooijer, J et al. (2006) Predicting fruit consumption: cognitions, intention, and habits. J Nutr Educ Behav 38, 7381.
15. Marcy, TR, Britton, ML & Harrison, D (2011) Identification of barriers to appropriate dietary behavior in low-income patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Ther 2, 919.
16. Schatzer, M, Rust, P & Elmadfa, I (2010) Fruit and vegetable intake in Austrian adults: intake frequency, serving sizes, reasons for and barriers to consumption, and potential for increasing consumption. Public Health Nutr 13, 480487.
17. Van Duyn, MA, Kristal, AR, Dodd, K et al. (2001) Association of awareness, intrapersonal and interpersonal factors, and stage of dietary change with fruit and vegetable consumption: a national survey. Am J Health Promot 16, 6978.
18. Haynes-Maslow, L, Parsons, SE, Wheeler, SB et al. (2013) A qualitative study of perceived barriers to fruit and vegetable consumption among low-income populations, North Carolina, 2011. Prev Chronic Dis 10, E34.
19. McLeod, ER, Campbell, KJ & Hesketh, KD (2011) Nutrition knowledge: a mediator between socioeconomic position and diet quality in Australian first-time mothers. J Am Diet Assoc 111, 696704.
20. Hughes, G, Bennett, KM & Hetherington, MM (2004) Old and alone: barriers to healthy eating in older men living on their own. Appetite 43, 269276.
21. Holmes, BA & Roberts, CL (2011) Diet quality and the influence of social and physical factors on food consumption and nutrient intake in materially deprived older people. Eur J Clin Nutr 65, 538545.
22. Donini, LM, Savina, C & Cannella, C (2003) Eating habits and appetite control in the elderly: the anorexia of aging. Int Psychogeriatr 15, 7387.
23. Appleton, KM, McGill, R, Neville, C et al. (2010) Barriers to increasing fruit and vegetable intakes in the older population of Northern Ireland: low levels of liking and low awareness of current recommendations. Public Health Nutr 13, 514521.
24. Huisman, M, Poppelaars, J, van der Horst, M et al. (2011) Cohort profile: the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam. Int J Epidemiol 40, 868876.
25. Krieger, N, Williams, DR & Moss, NE (1997) Measuring social class in US public health research: concepts, methodologies, and guidelines. Annu Rev Public Health 18, 341378.
26. Planbureau, C (2014) Modaal inkomen. http://www.cpb.nl/onderwerp/arbeidsmarkt (accessed March 2014).
27. Koster, A, Bosma, H, Broese van Groenou, MI et al. (2006) Explanations of socioeconomic differences in changes in physical function in older adults: results from the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam. BMC Public Health 6, 244.
28. Nieuwenhuizen, WF, Weenen, H, Rigby, P et al. (2010) Older adults and patients in need of nutritional support: review of current treatment options and factors influencing nutritional intake. Clin Nutr 29, 160169.
29. Shaikh, AR, Yaroch, AL, Nebeling, L et al. (2008) Psychosocial predictors of fruit and vegetable consumption in adults a review of the literature. Am J Prev Med 34, 535543.
30. Radloff, L (1997) The CES-D scale: a self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Appl Psychol Meas 1, 385401.
31. Berkman, L, Berkman, C & Kasl, S et al. (1986) Depressive symptoms in relation to physical health and functioning in the elderly. Am J Epidemiol 124, 372388.
32. Block, G, Gillespie, C, Rosenbaum, EH et al. (2000) A rapid food screener to assess fat and fruit and vegetable intake. Am J Prev Med 18, 284288.
33. Kim, DJ & Holowaty, EJ (2003) Brief, validated survey instruments for the measurement of fruit and vegetable intakes in adults: a review. Prev Med 36, 440447.
34. Stel, V, Smit, J, Pluijm, S et al. (2004) Comparison of the LASA Physical Activity Questionnaire with a 7-day diary and pedometer. J Clin Epidemiol 57, 252258.
35. Mackenbach, JP & Kunst, AE (1997) Measuring the magnitude of socio-economic inequalities in health: an overview of available measures illustrated with two examples from Europe. Soc Sci Med 44, 757771.
36. Le, J, Dallongeville, J, Wagner, A et al. (2013) Attitudes toward healthy eating: a mediator of the educational level–diet relationship. Eur J Clin Nutr 67, 808814.
37. Drewnowski, A (2010) The cost of US foods as related to their nutritive value. Am J Clin Nutr 92, 11811188.
38. Darmon, N, Darmon, M, Maillot, M et al. (2005) A nutrient density standard for vegetables and fruits: nutrients per calorie and nutrients per unit cost. J Am Diet Assoc 105, 18811887.
39. Baker, AH & Wardle, J (2003) Sex differences in fruit and vegetable intake in older adults. Appetite 40, 269275.
40. Lancaster, KJ (2004) Characteristics influencing daily consumption of fruits and vegetables and low-fat dairy products in older adults with hypertension. J Nutr Elder 23, 2133.
41. Dye, CJ & Cason, KL (2005) Perceptions of older, low-income women about increasing intake of fruits and vegetables. J Nutr Elder 25, 2141.
42. Glasson, C, Chapman, K & James, E (2011) Fruit and vegetables should be targeted separately in health promotion programmes: differences in consumption levels, barriers, knowledge and stages of readiness for change. Public Health Nutr 14, 694701.
43. Anderson, AS (2007) Nutrition interventions in women in low-income groups in the UK. Proc Nutr Soc 66, 2532.
44. Aggarwal, A, Monsivais, P, Cook, AJ et al. (2011) Does diet cost mediate the relation between socioeconomic position and diet quality? Eur J Clin Nutr 65, 10591066.
45. Konttinen, H, Sarlio-Lahteenkorva, S, Silventoinen, K et al. (2013) Socio-economic disparities in the consumption of vegetables, fruit and energy-dense foods: the role of motive priorities. Public Health Nutr 16, 873882.
46. Turrell, G & Kavanagh, AM (2006) Socio-economic pathways to diet: modelling the association between socio-economic position and food purchasing behaviour. Public Health Nutr 9, 375383.
47. Beydoun, MA & Wang, Y (2008) How do socio-economic status, perceived economic barriers and nutritional benefits affect quality of dietary intake among US adults? Eur J Clin Nutr 62, 303313.
48. Grieger, JA, Miller, M & Cobiac, L (2012) Knowledge and barriers relating to fish consumption in older Australians. Appetite 59, 456463.
49. Trondsen, T, Scholderer, J, Lund, E et al. (2003) Perceived barriers to consumption of fish among Norwegian women. Appetite 41, 301314.
50. Geliebter, A, Ang, IYH, Bernales-Korins, M et al. (2013) Supermarket discounts of low-energy density foods: effects on purchasing, food intake, and body weight. Obesity (Silver Spring) 21, E542E548.
51. Waterlander, WE, de Boer, MR, Schuit, AJ et al. (2013) Price discounts significantly enhance fruit and vegetable purchases when combined with nutrition education: a randomized controlled supermarket trial. Am J Clin Nutr 97, 886895.
52. Green, R, Cornelsen, L, Dangour, AD et al. (2013) The effect of rising food prices on food consumption: systematic review with meta-regression. BMJ 346, f3703.
53. Vesnaver, E, Keller, HH, Payette, H et al. (2012) Dietary resilience as described by older community-dwelling adults from the NuAge study ‘if there is a will – there is a way!’. Appetite 58, 730738.

Keywords

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed