4.0 Article

Diet and nutrient intake of pregnant women in the capital area in Iceland

Journal

LAEKNABLADID
Volume 102, Issue 9, Pages 378-384

Publisher

LAEKNAFELAG ISLANDS-ICELANDIC MEDICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.17992/lbl.2016.09.95

Keywords

pregnancy; nutrition; dietary intake; essential fatty acids; iodine; vitamin D; folic acid

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: Nutrition in pregnancy may affect growth, development and health of the child in the short and long term. We aimed to assess diet and nutrient intake among pregnant women in the capital area and evaluate differences in dietary intake between women who were overweight/obese and normal weight before pregnancy. Material and methods: Pregnant women aged 18-40 years (n=183) living in the capital area kept four day weighed food records to assess diet and nutrient intake in the 19th-24th week of pregnancy (n=98 with body mass index (BMI) <25 kg/m(2); n=46 with BMI 25-29.9 kg/m(2) and n=39 with BMI >= 30 kg/m(2)). Results: Only 20% of the women consumed the minimum recommended 25 g/day of dietary fibers. The contribution of added sugar to the total energy intake was on average 12% (SD 5%). About one-fourth appeared not to meet requirements for iodine, vitamin D and DHA (docosahexaenoic acid). No overconsumption of vitamins and minerals from food or supplements was observed. Higher median intake of milk and dairy products (346 g/day vs. 258 g/day, p<0.05), soft drinks (200 g/day vs. 122 g/day, p<0.05), as well as chips and popcorn (13 g/day vs. 0 g/day, p<0,05) was observed among women with BMI.30 kg/m(2) compared with women of normal weight before pregnancy (BMI <25 kg/m(2)). Conclusion: Dietary habits and choices among women require enhanced consideration both before and in pregnancy, particularly among those who are obese. Sub-optimal consumption of iodine, vitamin D and DHA, was seen among up to a quarter of the pregnant women.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available