PD068 - VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY OF A NEW DIET QUALITY SCREENER: DESIGN AND PRIMARY FINDINGS OF THE DQSCREEN STUDY

PD068

VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY OF A NEW DIET QUALITY SCREENER: DESIGN AND PRIMARY FINDINGS OF THE DQSCREEN STUDY

L. Hoffmann^1,2,*, J. Allgaier¹, S. Egert², C. Holzapfel^1,3, K. Kohlenberg-Müller¹

¹Department of Nutritional, Food and Consumer Sciences, University of Applied Sciences Fulda, Fulda, ²Institute of Nutritional and Food Science, Nutritional Physiology, University of Bonn, Bonn, ³TUM University Hospital, School of Medicine and Health, Institute for Clinical Nutritional Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany

Rationale: Diet quality screeners assess dietary habits in a systematic, time-saving and practical way. Since there is no diet quality screener based on the current food-based dietary guidelines for Germany, our aim was to develop and validate the DQScreen.

Methods: The DQScreen assesses the quantity and quality of foods in nine food groups. Healthy adults were included in the DQScreen study. To assess validity, the DQScreen was administered twice, and a 3-day weighted food record (WFR), anthropometric parameters and biological samples (24-hour urine and fasting blood samples) were collected once. To assess reliability, the DQScreen was administered a third time after 14-20 days. This initial analysis uses Spearman and Pearson correlation coefficients.

Results: Following a per-protocol analysis, 144 complete data sets were available (56.9 % women, 43.3 ± 12.1 years, body mass index 25.0 ± 4.0 kg/m²). Participants had a mean daily energy intake of 2327 ± 581 kcal, with 1.2 ± 0.3 g protein per kg body weight, 38.5 ± 7.1% of energy from fat and 41.4 ± 6.5% of energy from carbohydrates. Mean daily fibre intake was 27.1 ± 11.3 g, potassium intake was 3229.0 ± 1054.0 mg and sodium intake was 3139.1 ± 1383.1 mg. Data from the WFR and urinary biomarkers correlated from acceptable to good (r = 0.63 for protein, r = 0.60 for potassium, r = 0.35 for sodium; p < 0.001). Correlation analysis showed acceptable to good correlations (ρ > 0.20 to ρ > 0.50; p < 0.05) for the food groups in the WFR and DQScreen.

Conclusion: According to the results of the WFR compared with the urinary biomarkers, the WFR is a strong reference standard for validating the DQScreen. Primary analyses indicate that the DQScreen is valid and might have the potential to improve assessment of diet quality in dietetic therapy.

Disclosure of Interest: None declared