Estimated portion sizeversusactual intake of eight commonly consumed foods by healthy adults

Food selection in a buffet scenario by persons in recovery from substance use disorder: Testing a parallel mediation model including impulsivity, food craving, and breadth of drug use

Elevated food cravings and higher food consumption and body weight have been reported in studies of people in recovery from substance use disorder (SUD). In a previous study, SUD recovery status predicted the energy from selected food images in a virtual buffet meal, most strongly in those with high reward responsiveness. The present study was conducted to determine which psychological variables might mediate the relationship between SUD recovery status and food selection and to replicate the finding that reward responsiveness moderated this relationship. In an online study, 216 women and men (109 in recovery from SUD) were asked to choose from among 16 food images in an all-you-can-eat buffet scenario. Food craving, impulsivity, "food addiction", irrational food beliefs, anhedonia, and breadth of drug use were examined as potential mediators while reward responsiveness was examined as a potential moderator. The amount of energy in the selected foods was the outcome variable. Results indicated that breadth of drug use was a mediator; being in SUD recovery predicted higher variety of drug use which predicted higher food selection. However, reward responsiveness did not moderate the relationship between SUD recovery status and energy from the selected foods. Exploratory analysis indicated that lack of premeditation, a measure of impulsivity, with food craving partially mediated the relationship between breadth of drug use and energy from selected foods and that lack of premeditation fully mediated it for sweet foods. The results confirm an association between substance use and food selection and suggest a mechanism via impulsivity.

The Impact of Modifiable Preoral Factors on Swallowing and Nutritional Outcomes in Healthy Adults: A Scoping Review

PURPOSE

Swallowing has previously been characterized as consisting of four phases; however, it has become apparent that these four phases are not truly discrete and may be influenced by factors occurring prior to bolus entrance into the oral cavity (i.e., preoral factors). Still, the relationship between these factors and swallowing remains poorly understood. The aim of this review was to synthesize and characterize the literature pertaining to the influence of preoral factors on swallowing and nutritional outcomes in healthy individuals.

METHOD

We performed a scoping review, searching the databases of PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, and Scopus. Search terms included those related to swallowing, experience of preoral factors, and exclusionary terminology to reduce animal and pediatric literature. Our initial search revealed 5,560 unique articles, of which 153 met our inclusionary criteria and were accepted into the review.

RESULTS

Of the accepted articles, 78% were focused exclusively on nutritional outcomes, 17% were focused on both swallowing and nutritional outcomes, and 5% were focused on solely swallowing outcomes. Of the preoral factors examined, 99% were exteroceptive in nature (17% olfactory, 44% visual, 21% auditory, 7% tactile, 11% other), while 1% were proprioceptive in nature.

CONCLUSIONS

This review supports the influence of preoral factors on swallowing and nutritional outcomes. However, there is a large emphasis on the visual modality and on nutritional outcomes. Nearly none of the literature found in this review directly measured swallowing safety, efficiency, or physiology. Future work will benefit from a larger focus on proprioceptive preoral factors as they relate to swallowing outcomes.

Energy Expenditure, Carbohydrate Oxidation and Appetitive Responses to Sucrose or Sucralose in Humans: A Pilot Study

Background: In light of obesity, replacing sugar with non-nutritive sweeteners is commonly used to reduce sugar content of food products. This study aimed to compare human energy expenditure (EE), carbohydrate oxidation and food intake after the ingestion of test foods sweetened with sucrose or a non-nutritive sweetener. Methods: This was an acute crossover feeding study that entailed consumption of three test foods: jelly sweetened with 50 g sucrose (SUCROSE), with 120 mg of sucralose only (NNS), or 120 mg sucralose but matched in carbohydrate with 50 g maltodextrin (MALT). On test days, participants arrived at the research facility after an overnight fast. Resting energy expenditure (indirect calorimeter) was measured for 30 min followed by jelly consumption. Participants’ EE and substrate oxidation were measured for 90 min subsequently. After EE assessment, participants completed a meal challenge before leaving the research facility, and recorded food intake for the remaining day. Subjective appetite ratings were assessed before and after test foods and meal challenge. Results: Eleven participants completed the study. EE was higher in SUCROSE and MALT than NNS, but not statistically significant. Carbohydrate oxidation was SUCROSE > MALT > NNS (p < 0.001). Earlier and bigger rise in carbohydrate oxidation was observed in SUCROSE than MALT, although both were carbohydrate-matched. NNS did not promote energy expenditure, carbohydrate oxidation or stimulate appetite. Conclusions: Foods sweetened with sucrose or non-nutritive sweeteners but matched in carbohydrate content have different effects on human EE and carbohydrate oxidation. Sucralose alone did not affect EE, but lower energy in the test food from sugar replacement was eventually fully compensated. Findings from this pilot study should be verified with bigger clinical studies in the future to establish clinical relevance.