Suchergebnisse

Background: Measures for containing the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 and 2021 resulted in drastic changes in physical activity and dietary habits that also impacted body weight. Methods: The representative study German Health Update (GEDA 2021) includes self-reported information about body weight and body height for adults aged 18 years and older (n=2,985) from July to October 2021. In addition, the study asked about changes in body weight since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: For 59% of participants, body weight has not changed since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, 26% report weight gain, and 15% report weight loss. Younger people indicate weight gain more often than older people, and individuals with obesity report weight gain more often than individuals without obesity. 1.5 years after the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the average weight change within the population is approximately +0.34kg. Conclusions: The effects of restrictions in everyday life with regard to the possible negative impacts on body weight should be given greater consideration and should be monitored in the future.

Hintergrund und Ziel der Arbeit: Bei der Kariesprophylaxe spielt eine wirksame und sichere Fluoridanwendung eine wichtige Rolle. Fluoride machen den Zahnschmelz widerstandsfähiger und schützen vor Karies. Dieser Beitrag gibt einen Überblick über die Fluoridanwendung aus unterschiedlichen Quellen zur Kariesprophylaxe bei Kindern und Jugendlichen in Deutschland. Methoden: Datengrundlage sind die in KiGGS Welle 2 (2014-2017) durchgeführten Ernährungsstudien KiESEL für 0,5- bis 5-Jährige und EsKiMo II für 6- bis 17-Jährige. Die Daten geben Auskunft über die Verwendung von Fluoridsupplementen, fluoridhaltiger Zahnpasta und fluoridiertem Salz. Ausgewiesen werden Prävalenzen und Ergebnisse multivariater binär-logistischer Regressionen. Es werden Unterschiede nach soziodemografischen Merkmalen berichtet. Ergebnisse: Von den 0,5- bis 5-Jährigen hatten 14,6 % ein Fluoridsupplement erhalten. In allen betrachteten Altersgruppen verwendeten über 90 % der Kinder und Jugendlichen üblicherweise fluoridhaltige Zahnpasta, mit Ausnahme der 0,5- bis 2-Jährigen (63,4 %). In etwa der Hälfte der Haushalte (51,3 %) der 0,5- bis 5-Jährigen wurden Mahlzeiten für das Kind überwiegend mit fluoridiertem Salz zubereitet. Bei den 6- bis 17-Jährigen war dies nur bei etwa einem Drittel (29,8 %) der Fall. Diskussion: Die Verwendung fluoridhaltiger Zahnpasta hat im Vergleich zur KiGGS-Basiserhebung (2003-2006) zugenommen. Sie ist bei den 0,5- bis 2-Jährigen gering, was sich teilweise durch die Empfehlungen zur Zeit der Datenerhebung erklären lässt, aber auch damit, dass bei einem Teil dieser Kinder (noch) keine Zahnpasta verwendet wurde. Fluoridiertes Salz wird insbesondere bei Kindern ab 6 Jahren noch zu selten zur Mahlzeitenzubereitung genutzt. Dies spricht für eine verstärkte Kommunikation der Empfehlungen zur Kariesprophylaxe und zur Förderung einer zahngesunden Ernährung.

Children and adolescents spend a large part of their time at school, which is why the quality of school meals is of great importance. In this study, the extent to which intakes of various food groups among children and adolescents were in line with the recommendations of the Optimised Mixed Diet (OMD) were examined according to frequency of utilisation of school meals, based on data from the second Eating study as a KiGGS Module (EsKiMo II). Among 6- to 11-year-old boys, more frequent (≥ three times weekly) utilisation of school meals is associated with more frequently meeting or exceeding the OMD recommendation for fruit consumption. The same is true among 12- to 17-year-old girls for eggs and fats/oils used for cooking or spreads, and among 12- to 17-year-old boys for fish. The results from EsKiMo II show that regular uptake of school meals is associated with differences in intakes of various food groups with respect to the OMD recommendations.

Background A pan-European approach to evaluate policy impact on health behaviour requires the employment of a consensus set of established and relevant indicators. Methods As part of the Joint Programming Initiative on a Healthy Diet for a Healthy Life, the Policy Evaluation Network PEN identified key indicators of health behaviours and their determinants. These key indicators are already, or have the potential to be, adopted by large European Union surveillance systems for the assessment of policy impact. The iterative selection process included consultations in two rounds via email prior to a 2-days expert workshop. The experts collated a list of dietary behaviour, physical activity and sedentary behaviour indicators for European policy monitoring in young and adult populations based on existing frameworks and literature reviews. The expert panel was composed of researchers, policy makers and representatives of major European surveillance systems and related initiatives, as well as, representatives of organisations providing monitoring data, such as the European Commission and Eurostat. Results The process provided two lists of key indicators including 37 diet 'policy' indicators and 35 indicators for dietary behaviour and their 'determinants'; as well as 32 physical activity 'policy' indicators and 35 indicators for physical activity, sedentary behaviour and their 'determinants'. Conclusion A total of 139 key indicators related to the individual, the setting and the population level, and suitable for the assessment of dietary behaviour, physical activity and sedentary behaviour were prioritised by policy makers and researchers with the ultimate aim to embed policy evaluation measures in existing surveillance systems across the European Union. In a next step, data sources and suitable instruments will be identified to assess these key indicators.

BACKGROUND: A pan-European approach to evaluate policy impact on health behaviour requires the employment of a consensus set of established and relevant indicators. METHODS: As part of the Joint Programming Initiative on a Healthy Diet for a Healthy Life, the Policy Evaluation Network PEN identified key indicators of health behaviours and their determinants. These key indicators are already, or have the potential to be, adopted by large European Union surveillance systems for the assessment of policy impact. The iterative selection process included consultations in two rounds via email prior to a 2-days expert workshop. The experts collated a list of dietary behaviour, physical activity and sedentary behaviour indicators for European policy monitoring in young and adult populations based on existing frameworks and literature reviews. The expert panel was composed of researchers, policy makers and representatives of major European surveillance systems and related initiatives, as well as, representatives of organisations providing monitoring data, such as the European Commission and Eurostat. RESULTS: The process provided two lists of key indicators including 37 diet 'policy' indicators and 35 indicators for dietary behaviour and their 'determinants'; as well as 32 physical activity 'policy' indicators and 35 indicators for physical activity, sedentary behaviour and their 'determinants'. CONCLUSION: A total of 139 key indicators related to the individual, the setting and the population level, and suitable for the assessment of dietary behaviour, physical activity and sedentary behaviour were prioritised by policy makers and researchers with the ultimate aim to embed policy evaluation measures in existing surveillance systems across the European Union. In a next step, data sources and suitable instruments will be identified to assess these key indicators. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12966-021-01111-0.

BACKGROUND:A pan-European approach to evaluate policy impact on health behaviour requires the employment of a consensus set of established and relevant indicators. METHODS: As part of the Joint Programming Initiative on a Healthy Diet for a Healthy Life, the Policy Evaluation Network PEN identified key indicators of health behaviours and their determinants. These key indicators are already, or have the potential to be, adopted by large European Union surveillance systems for the assessment of policy impact. The iterative selection process included consultations in two rounds via email prior to a 2-days expert workshop. The experts collated a list of dietary behaviour, physical activity and sedentary behaviour indicators for European policy monitoring in young and adult populations based on existing frameworks and literature reviews. The expert panel was composed of researchers, policy makers and representatives of major European surveillance systems and related initiatives, as well as, representatives of organisations providing monitoring data, such as the European Commission and Eurostat. RESULTS: The process provided two lists of key indicators including 37 diet 'policy' indicators and 35 indicators for dietary behaviour and their 'determinants'; as well as 32 physical activity 'policy' indicators and 35 indicators for physical activity, sedentary behaviour and their 'determinants'. CONCLUSIONS: A total of 139 key indicators related to the individual, the setting and the population level, and suitable for the assessment of dietary behaviour, physical activity and sedentary behaviour were prioritised by policy makers and researchers with the ultimate aim to embed policy evaluation measures in existing surveillance systems across the European Union. In a next step, data sources and suitable instruments will be identified to assess these key indicators.

Background A pan-European approach to evaluate policy impact on health behaviour requires the employment of a consensus set of established and relevant indicators. Methods As part of the Joint Programming Initiative on a Healthy Diet for a Healthy Life, the Policy Evaluation Network PEN identified key indicators of health behaviours and their determinants. These key indicators are already, or have the potential to be, adopted by large European Union surveillance systems for the assessment of policy impact. The iterative selection process included consultations in two rounds via email prior to a 2-days expert workshop. The experts collated a list of dietary behaviour, physical activity and sedentary behaviour indicators for European policy monitoring in young and adult populations based on existing frameworks and literature reviews. The expert panel was composed of researchers, policy makers and representatives of major European surveillance systems and related initiatives, as well as, representatives of organisations providing monitoring data, such as the European Commission and Eurostat. Results The process provided two lists of key indicators including 37 diet 'policy' indicators and 35 indicators for dietary behaviour and their 'determinants'; as well as 32 physical activity 'policy' indicators and 35 indicators for physical activity, sedentary behaviour and their 'determinants'. Conclusion A total of 139 key indicators related to the individual, the setting and the population level, and suitable for the assessment of dietary behaviour, physical activity and sedentary behaviour were prioritised by policy makers and researchers with the ultimate aim to embed policy evaluation measures in existing surveillance systems across the European Union. In a next step, data sources and suitable instruments will be identified to assess these key indicators. ; Peer Reviewed

peer-reviewed ; Background: A pan-European approach to evaluate policy impact on health behaviour requires the employment of a consensus set of established and relevant indicators. Methods: As part of the Joint Programming Initiative on a Healthy Diet for a Healthy Life, the Policy Evaluation Network PEN identified key indicators of health behaviours and their determinants. These key indicators are already, or have the potential to be, adopted by large European Union surveillance systems for the assessment of policy impact. The iterative selection process included consultations in two rounds via email prior to a 2-days expert workshop. The experts collated a list of dietary behaviour, physical activity and sedentary behaviour indicators for European policy monitoring in young and adult populations based on existing frameworks and literature reviews. The expert panel was composed of researchers, policy makers and representatives of major European surveillance systems and related initiatives, as well as, representatives of organisations providing monitoring data, such as the European Commission and Eurostat. Results: The process provided two lists of key indicators including 37 diet 'policy' indicators and 35 indicators for dietary behaviour and their 'determinants'; as well as 32 physical activity 'policy' indicators and 35 indicators for physical activity, sedentary behaviour and their 'determinants'. Conclusion: A total of 139 key indicators related to the individual, the setting and the population level, and suitable for the assessment of dietary behaviour, physical activity and sedentary behaviour were prioritised by policy makers and researchers with the ultimate aim to embed policy evaluation measures in existing surveillance systems across the European Union. In a next step, data sources and suitable instruments will be identified to assess these key indicators.

Source: doi:10.3945/ajcn.115.120873 ; Background: Vitamin D deficiency has been described as being pandemic, but serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] distribution data for the European Union are of very variable quality. The NIH-led international Vitamin D Standardization Program (VDSP) has developed protocols for standardizing existing 25(OH)D values from national health/nutrition surveys. Objective: This study applied VDSP protocols to serum 25(OH)D data from representative childhood/teenage and adult/older adult European populations, representing a sizable geographical footprint, to better quantify the prevalence of vitamin D deficiency in Europe. Design: The VDSP protocols were applied in 14 population studies [reanalysis of subsets of serum 25(OH)D in 11 studies and complete analysis of all samples from 3 studies that had not previously measured it] by using certified liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry on biobanked sera. These data were combined with standardized serum 25(OH)D data from 4 previously standardized studies (for a total n = 55,844). Prevalence estimates of vitamin D deficiency [using various serum 25(OH)D thresholds] were generated on the basis of standardized 25(OH)D data. Results: An overall pooled estimate, irrespective of age group, ethnic mix, and latitude of study populations, showed that 13.0% of the 55,844 European individuals had serum 25(OH)D concentrations <30 nmol/L on average in the year, with 17.7% and 8.3% in those sampled during the extended winter (October–March) and summer (April–November) periods, respectively. According to an alternate suggested definition of vitamin D deficiency (<50 nmol/L), the prevalence was 40.4%. Dark-skinned ethnic subgroups had much higher (3- to 71-fold) prevalence of serum 25(OH)D <30 nmol/L than did white populations. Conclusions: Vitamin D deficiency is evident throughout the European population at prevalence rates that are concerning and that require action from a public health perspective. What direction these strategies take will depend on European policy but should aim to ensure vitamin D intakes that are protective against vitamin D deficiency in the majority of the European population.