4.6 Article

FRUIT FORM INFLUENCES POSTPRANDIAL GLYCEMIC RESPONSE IN ELDERLY AND YOUNG ADULTS

Journal

JOURNAL OF NUTRITION HEALTH & AGING
Volume 21, Issue 8, Pages 887-891

Publisher

SPRINGER FRANCE
DOI: 10.1007/s12603-017-0880-9

Keywords

CV: coefficient of variation; GI: glycemic index; GR: glycemic response; iAUC: incremental area under the curve; VAS: visual analog scale

Funding

  1. Singapore Institute for Clinical Sciences, Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: This study compared the effects of consuming different forms (bite size, puree) and two fruit types (guava, papaya) on glycemic response (GR) in elderly and young adults. Design: This study was conducted using a randomized, crossover design. Participants: Nineteen healthy participants (9 elderly, 10 young adults) were recruited from the general public in Singapore. Intervention: Participants consumed glucose (reference food) on three occasions and test fruits (guava bites, guava puree, papaya bites, and papaya puree) on one occasion each. Measurements: Blood glucose was analyzed prior to consuming the test food, at 15, 30, 45, 60, 90 and 120 minutes after food consumption. Results: The incremental area under the blood glucose response curve (iAUC) over 120 minutes for all the treatments was significantly lower than glucose (all P < 0.001). All fruit forms and types studied were low glycemic index (GI) (guava bites: 29; papaya bites: 38; papaya puree: 42; guava puree: 47), albeit a significant difference in GI between the treatments was found (P = 0.003). Elderly exhibited significantly greater GR than young participants (P = 0.019). Conclusion: Although fruit form influences GR in the elderly and young adults, all fruit types and forms studied were found to be low GI. This study indicates that fruits are a valuable source of nutrient irrespective of the form of delivery in elderly and young adults. This study was registered at www. anzctr. org. au as ACTRN12614000655640.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available