Besin Ögesi Örüntü Profili: Toplu Beslenme Hizmeti Veren Kuruluşlarda Uygulanan Menülerin Değerlendirilmesi

Amaç: Bu çalışma, Toplu Beslenme Hizmeti verilen kuruluşlarda sunulan çeşitli menülerin, spesifik amaçlar doğrultusunda bilimsel ve pragmatik ilkelere göre besinlerin, besin ögesi bileşimlerinin hesaplanması için kullanılan besin ögesi örüntü profil modelleri ile değerlendirilmesi amacıyla gerçekleştirilmiştir. Gereç ve Yöntem: Ankarada Toplu Beslenme Hizmeti veren 3ü özel, 2si devlet üniversitesi yemekhanesinde sunulan bir aylık menülerin tümünü kapsayan ve sınıfa özgü uluslararası kullanılan valide edilmiş FSA-WXY Ofcom (Food Standards Agency-FSA), Besin Ögesinden Yoğun Besin NRF9.3 modeli (Nutrient Rich Food Index 9.3) ve Uluslararası Sağlıklı Seçimler Modeli (Choices International) besin ögesi örüntü profil modelleri ile değerlendirilmiştir. Bulgular: Bu çalışmada, WXY Ofcom modelinde elde edilen skorların tümü 4 puanın altında, NRF 9.3 modeline göre ise en düşük puanı C özel üniversitesi (12.28±9.0 puan) alırken, en yüksek puanı ise B devlet üniversitesi (19.7±7.5 puan) almıştır. Uluslararası Sağlıklı Seçimler modeline göre tüm üniversite yemekhanelerinde uygulanan menülerin lif/posa (%50.9) ve doymuş yağ asidi (%21.5) içerikleri nedeniyle kriterleri sağlayamadıkları saptanmıştır Sonuç: Menülerin NRF 9.3 Modeli ve Uluslararası Sağlıklı Seçimler Modeli ile yapılan hesaplamalarından elde edilen sonuçlar daha uygun bulunmuştur. Besin ögesi örüntü profilleri menülerin değerlendirilmesi için bilimsel temelli objektif bir araçtır.

Nutrient Profiling: Evaluation of Menus Served in Institutional Food Service Systems

Aim: This study was conducted to evaluate the different menus served in institutional food service systems with the models developed for specific purposes, according to the principles of the scientific and pragmatic nutrient composition with respect to their nutritional compositions. Material and Methods: Monthly lunch menus of five university (three foundation and two state universities) cafeteria, located in Ankara were evaluated with across the board and category specific, internationally validated Nutrient Rich Food Index 9.3 (NRF 9.3), Food Standards Agency (FSA) FSA-Ofcom WXY and Choices International nutrient profiling models. Results: It was found that according to FSA-Ofcom WXY model all the scores were below 4 and menus were considered as healthier and according to NRF 9.3 model lowest score was determined in C foundation university (12.28±9.0 point) and the highest score was determined in B state university (19.7±7.5 point). According to Choices International model, cafeteria menus were not complying the fiber (50.9%) and saturated fatty acid (21.5%) criteria of the model. Conclusion: In the evaluation of menus, more appropriate results were obtained with NRF 9.3 and International Choices models. It could be concluded that nutrient profiling models are objective tools and could be used to evaluate the catering menus.

PDF

___

1.Quinio C, Biltoft-Jensen A, De Henauw S, Gibney MJ, Huybrechts I, McCarthy SN, et al. Comparison of different nutrient profiling schemes to a new reference method using dietary surveys. Eur J Nutr 2007;46 Suppl 2:37-46.
2.Garsetti M, de Vries J, Smith M, Amosse A, Rolf- Pedersen N. Nutrient profiling schemes: overview and comparative analysis. Eur J Nutr 2007;46 Suppl 2:15- 28.
3.Drewnowski A. Defining nutrient density: development and validation of the nutrient rich foods index. J Am Coll Nutr 2009;28(4):421S-416S.
4.Food Standard Agency. Scientific workshop to assess the Food Standards Agencys proposed approach to nutrient profiling Friday 25th February 2005 Bonnington Hotel Bloomsbury, London; 2005. Available at: http://www. food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/nutprofworkshop250205. pdf Accessed August 16, 2011.
5.EFSA. The Setting of Nutrient Profiles For Foods Bearing Nutrition and Health Claims Pursuant to Article 4 of The Regulation (Ec) ° No 1924/2006 Scientific Opinion of The Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (Request N° Efsa-Q-2007-058). The EFSA Journal 2008;644:1-44.
6.Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme Codex Committee on Food Labelling Matters of Interest Arising from FAO and WHO Thirty-ninth Session. Québec City, Québec, Canada. 9-13 May 2011. Available at: www.codexalimentarius.net/download/ report/765/REP11_FLe.pdf Accessed August 16, 2012.
7.WHO. Nutrient profiling Report of a WHO/IASO Technical Meeting London, United Kingdom 4-6 October 2010. Switzerland, World Health Organization; 2011.
8.Drewnowski A, Fulgoni V, 3rd. Nutrient profiling of foods: creating a nutrient-rich food index. Nutr Rev 2008;66(1):23-39.
9.Nicklas TA. Nutrient profiling: the new environment. J Am Coll Nutr 2009;28(4):416S-420S.
10.Drewnowski A. Concept of a nutritious food: toward a nutrient density score. Am J Clin Nutr 2005;82(4):721- 732.
11.Zelman K, Kennedy E. Naturally nutrient rich putting more power on americans plates. Nutr Today 2005;40(2):60-68.
12.Verhagen, H, van den Berg, HA. Simple visual model to compare existing nutrient profiling schemes. Food Nutr Res 2008;52:10.3402/fnr.v52i0.1649.
13.Tetens I, Oberdorfer R, Madsen C, de Vries, J. Nutritional characterisation of foods: science-based approach to nutrient profiling. Summary report of an ILSI Europe workshop held in April 2006. Eur J Nutr 2007;46(Suppl 2):4-14.
14.Scarborough, P, Boxer, A, Rayner, M, Stockley, L. Testing nutrient profile models using data from a survey of nutrition professionals. Public Health Nutr 2007;10(4):337-345.
15.Sacks G, Rayner M, Stockley L, Scarborough P, Snowdon W, Swinburn B. Applications of nutrient profiling: potential role in diet-related chronic disease prevention and the feasibility of a core nutrient-profiling system. Eur J Clin Nutr 2011;65(3):298-306.
16.Rayner M, Scarborough P, Boxer A, Stockley L. Nutrient profiles: Development of Final Model Final Report. 2005. Available At: http://www.food.gov.uk/ multimedia/pdfs/nutprofr.pdf Accessed August 16, 2012.
17.Department of Health. Nutrient Profiling Technical Guidance January 2011 UK. Available At: http://www. dh.gov.uk/prod_consum_dh/groups/dh_digitalassets/ documents/digitalasset/dh_123492.pdf Accessed August,16 2012.
18.Drewnowski A. The Nutrient Rich Foods Index helps to identify healthy, affordable foods. Am J Clin Nutr 2010;91(4):1095S-101S.
19.Roodenburg AJ, Popkin BM, Seidell JC. Development of international criteria for a front of package food labelling system: the International Choices Programme. Eur J Clin Nutr 2011;65(11):1190-1200.
20.Dikmen D, Uyar MF, Kolaç D, Eser G, Eğri H, Efeoğlu T, Sağlam F. Ankarada bulunan özel ve devlet üniversite öğrencilerinin üniversite yemekhanesinden memnuniyet durumlarının değerlendirilmesi Poster. Hacettepe Beslenme ve Diyetetik Günleri III. Mezuniyet Sonrası Eğitim Kursu Ankara. 22-25 Haziran 2011.
21.Merdol Kutluay T. Toplu Beslenme Yapılan Kurumlar İçin Standart Yemek Tarifeleri, Hatipoğlu Basım ve Yayım San. Tic. Ltd. Şti,3. Baskı, Şahin Matbaası, Ankara, 2003.
22.H.Ü. Beslenme ve Diyetetik Bölümü/T.C. Sağlık Bakanlığı. Türkiyeye Özgü Beslenme Rehberi. Ankara: T.C. Sağlık Bakanlığı Temel Sağlık Hizmetleri Genel Müdürlüğü. 2006.
23.Beyhan Y, Ciğerim N. Toplu Beslenme Sistemlerinde Menü Yönetimi ve Denetimi. Kök Yayıncılık, Ankara, 1995.
24.Baysal A. Beslenme. 12. baskı. Hatipoğlu Yayınevi, Ankara, 2009.
25.Mahan LK, Escott-Stump S. Krauses food & nutrition therapy: Elsevier Saunders, 2008.
26.Sümbüloğlu K, Sümbüloğlu V. Biyoistatistik. 14.baskı. Hatiboğlu Yayınları, Ankara, 2010.
27.Ural, A., Kılıç, İ. Bilimsel Araştırma Süreci ve SPSS ile Veri Analizi. 3. Baskı. Detay Yayıncılık, Ankara, 2011.
28.WHO/FAO. Diet, nutrition and the prevention of chronic diseases, WHO Technical Report Series, 916. Geneva, WHO; 2003. Available at: whqlibdoc.who.int/ trs/who_trs_916.pdf Accessed January 25, 2011.
29.Tekcan A, Gezer B, Bizim O. Genel Matematik (Diferensiyel ve İntegral Hesap). 3. baskı. Dora Basım Yayın, Bursa, 2010.
30.Arambepola C, Scarborough P, Rayner M. Validating a nutrient profile model. Public Health Nutr 2008;11(4):371-378.
31.Fulgoni VL, 3rd, Keast DR, Drewnowski A. Development and validation of the nutrient-rich foods index: a tool to measure nutritional quality of foods. J Nutr 2009;139(8):1549-1554.
32.Roodenburg AJ, Schlatmann A, Dotsch-Klerk M, Daamen R, Dong J, Guarro M. et al. Potential effects of nutrient profiles on nutrient intakes in the Netherlands, Greece, Spain, USA, Israel, China and South-Africa. PloS one 2011;6(2), e14721.