Assessing Diet Quality of People with Parkinson’s Disease: Dietary Screening Tool Versus HEI-2015

Abstract

Abstract Objectives To assess the diet quality of people with Parkinson's Disease (PwPD) using two assessment tools: Healthy Eating Index (HEI)-2015 and the Dietary Screening Tool (DST). HEI-2015 and DST scores were compared for alignment to explore associations between HEI-2015 and DST total scores and sub-scores. Methods This secondary data analysis utilized a total of 28 participants from two studies examining PwPD and their informal caregivers. Dietary data was collected with two 24-hour recalls using the multiple pass method and entered into the Nutrition Data System for Research (NDSR). SAS Version 9.4 was used to compute HEI-2015 scores to assess diet quality. The HEI-2015 score is a total of 100 points and is based on the Dietary Guidelines for Americans for 2015–2020. Total HEI-2015 scores and 13 component scores were interpreted using the graded approach (grades A-F). Radar graphs provide a visual representation. Participants also completed the DST. The DST is a 25-item questionnaire used to identify dietary patterns and assess nutritional risk. Total scores were categorized into at risk <60, possibly risk 60–75, and not at risk >75. Sub-scores were calculated with point classifications for specific food categories. These sub-scores were divided into tertials of recommended intakes less than 50%, 50–80% and 80–100%, and compared for alignment between DST sub-scores and HEI-2015 sub-scores by assessing total number of pairs per category. Results The mean total score was 59.4 ± 28.6 for DST and 58.7 ± 22.2 for HEI-2015. HEI-2015 scores fell into grades of A (n = 0) B (n = 3) C (n = 3) D (n = 7) F (n = 14). PwPD who were categorized at risk from the DST scores (n = 18) received an HEI grade of D/F. PwPD who were at possible risk (n = 7) received a grade of B/C/D. PwPD who were not at risk (n = 3) received a grade of B/C/D for sub-scores, vegetable intake had a 50% alignment in scores, fat/sugar 43% alignment, whole grains and dairy 46% alignment and fruit 39% alignment. Conclusions There appeared to be partial alignment between the total HEI-2015 scores and DST nutritional risk scores. Sub-scores differ 50% of the time. Due to differences between the assessment tools, more research is needed to validate the DST in PwPD as this can be a less taxing assessment compared with 24-hour recalls. Funding Sources There was no external funding for this study.