How expensive is a cardioprotective diet? Analysis from the CRESSIDA study

Dianne P Reidlinger, Thomas Ab Sanders, Louise M Goff

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a cardioprotective dietary intervention based on UK dietary guidelines was more expensive than a conventional UK diet.

DESIGN: Cost analysis of food records collected at baseline and after a 12-week dietary intervention of a cardioprotective diet v. conventional UK diet.

SETTING: A randomized controlled dietary intervention study (CRESSIDA; ISRCTN 92382106) investigating the impact of following a diet consistent with UK dietary guidelines on CVD risk.

SUBJECTS: Participants were healthy UK residents aged 40-70 years. A sub-sample of participants was randomly selected from those who completed the cardioprotective dietary intervention (n 20) or the conventional UK dietary intervention (n 20).

RESULTS: Baseline diet costs did not differ between groups; mean daily food cost for all participants was £6·12 (sd £1·83). The intervention diets were not more expensive: at end point the mean daily cost of the cardioprotective diet was £6·43 (sd £2·05) v. the control diet which was £6·53 (sd £1·53; P=0·86).

CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence that consumption of a cardioprotective diet was more expensive than a conventional dietary pattern. Despite the perception that healthier foods are less affordable, these results suggest that cost may not be a barrier when modifying habitual intake and under tightly controlled trial conditions. The identification of specific food groups that may be a cost concern for individuals may be useful for tailoring interventions for CVD prevention for individuals and populations.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1423-1430
Number of pages8
JournalPublic Health Nutrition
Volume20
Issue number8
Early online date18 Jan 2017
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jun 2017

Fingerprint

Diet
Costs and Cost Analysis
Food
Nutrition Policy
Healthy Volunteers
Population

Cite this

Reidlinger, Dianne P ; Sanders, Thomas Ab ; Goff, Louise M. / How expensive is a cardioprotective diet? Analysis from the CRESSIDA study. In: Public Health Nutrition. 2017 ; Vol. 20, No. 8. pp. 1423-1430.
@article{ed7530de9ec249b79e777583ef58c7d5,
title = "How expensive is a cardioprotective diet? Analysis from the CRESSIDA study",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a cardioprotective dietary intervention based on UK dietary guidelines was more expensive than a conventional UK diet.DESIGN: Cost analysis of food records collected at baseline and after a 12-week dietary intervention of a cardioprotective diet v. conventional UK diet.SETTING: A randomized controlled dietary intervention study (CRESSIDA; ISRCTN 92382106) investigating the impact of following a diet consistent with UK dietary guidelines on CVD risk.SUBJECTS: Participants were healthy UK residents aged 40-70 years. A sub-sample of participants was randomly selected from those who completed the cardioprotective dietary intervention (n 20) or the conventional UK dietary intervention (n 20).RESULTS: Baseline diet costs did not differ between groups; mean daily food cost for all participants was £6·12 (sd £1·83). The intervention diets were not more expensive: at end point the mean daily cost of the cardioprotective diet was £6·43 (sd £2·05) v. the control diet which was £6·53 (sd £1·53; P=0·86).CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence that consumption of a cardioprotective diet was more expensive than a conventional dietary pattern. Despite the perception that healthier foods are less affordable, these results suggest that cost may not be a barrier when modifying habitual intake and under tightly controlled trial conditions. The identification of specific food groups that may be a cost concern for individuals may be useful for tailoring interventions for CVD prevention for individuals and populations.",
author = "Reidlinger, {Dianne P} and Sanders, {Thomas Ab} and Goff, {Louise M}",
year = "2017",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1017/S1368980016003529",
language = "English",
volume = "20",
pages = "1423--1430",
journal = "Public Health Nutrition",
issn = "1368-9800",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "8",

}

How expensive is a cardioprotective diet? Analysis from the CRESSIDA study. / Reidlinger, Dianne P; Sanders, Thomas Ab; Goff, Louise M.

In: Public Health Nutrition, Vol. 20, No. 8, 01.06.2017, p. 1423-1430.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - How expensive is a cardioprotective diet? Analysis from the CRESSIDA study

AU - Reidlinger, Dianne P

AU - Sanders, Thomas Ab

AU - Goff, Louise M

PY - 2017/6/1

Y1 - 2017/6/1

N2 - OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a cardioprotective dietary intervention based on UK dietary guidelines was more expensive than a conventional UK diet.DESIGN: Cost analysis of food records collected at baseline and after a 12-week dietary intervention of a cardioprotective diet v. conventional UK diet.SETTING: A randomized controlled dietary intervention study (CRESSIDA; ISRCTN 92382106) investigating the impact of following a diet consistent with UK dietary guidelines on CVD risk.SUBJECTS: Participants were healthy UK residents aged 40-70 years. A sub-sample of participants was randomly selected from those who completed the cardioprotective dietary intervention (n 20) or the conventional UK dietary intervention (n 20).RESULTS: Baseline diet costs did not differ between groups; mean daily food cost for all participants was £6·12 (sd £1·83). The intervention diets were not more expensive: at end point the mean daily cost of the cardioprotective diet was £6·43 (sd £2·05) v. the control diet which was £6·53 (sd £1·53; P=0·86).CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence that consumption of a cardioprotective diet was more expensive than a conventional dietary pattern. Despite the perception that healthier foods are less affordable, these results suggest that cost may not be a barrier when modifying habitual intake and under tightly controlled trial conditions. The identification of specific food groups that may be a cost concern for individuals may be useful for tailoring interventions for CVD prevention for individuals and populations.

AB - OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a cardioprotective dietary intervention based on UK dietary guidelines was more expensive than a conventional UK diet.DESIGN: Cost analysis of food records collected at baseline and after a 12-week dietary intervention of a cardioprotective diet v. conventional UK diet.SETTING: A randomized controlled dietary intervention study (CRESSIDA; ISRCTN 92382106) investigating the impact of following a diet consistent with UK dietary guidelines on CVD risk.SUBJECTS: Participants were healthy UK residents aged 40-70 years. A sub-sample of participants was randomly selected from those who completed the cardioprotective dietary intervention (n 20) or the conventional UK dietary intervention (n 20).RESULTS: Baseline diet costs did not differ between groups; mean daily food cost for all participants was £6·12 (sd £1·83). The intervention diets were not more expensive: at end point the mean daily cost of the cardioprotective diet was £6·43 (sd £2·05) v. the control diet which was £6·53 (sd £1·53; P=0·86).CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence that consumption of a cardioprotective diet was more expensive than a conventional dietary pattern. Despite the perception that healthier foods are less affordable, these results suggest that cost may not be a barrier when modifying habitual intake and under tightly controlled trial conditions. The identification of specific food groups that may be a cost concern for individuals may be useful for tailoring interventions for CVD prevention for individuals and populations.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85009743386&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1017/S1368980016003529

DO - 10.1017/S1368980016003529

M3 - Article

VL - 20

SP - 1423

EP - 1430

JO - Public Health Nutrition

JF - Public Health Nutrition

SN - 1368-9800

IS - 8

ER -