You have accessJournal of UrologyStone Disease: Therapy I1 Apr 2014PD7-05 ESTIMATING PATIENTS' INTAKE OF STONE-RELATED FOODS AND NUTRIENTS WITH A FOOD FREQUENCY QUESTIONNAIRE Margaret Wertheim, Rachel Bell, and Kristina L. Penniston Margaret WertheimMargaret Wertheim More articles by this author , Rachel BellRachel Bell More articles by this author , and Kristina L. PennistonKristina L. Penniston More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.02.694AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES 24-h urine parameters do not perfectly reflect habitual dietary intake as patients may alter their habits during the time of the collection and as renal excretion of many parameters does not represent intake. Many urologists are unable to assess patients' intake of specific foods and nutrients that may impact stone formation. This may lead to an over- or underestimation of dietary influence on stone risk. To address this problem, we developed a food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) to quantify patients' habitual intake of diet-related lithogenic risk factors. METHODS We mailed our previously-developed FFQ to stone formers (SFs) who completed a weighed 3-day diet record within 6 months. The FFQ was self-administered, completed at home, and returned by mail. We evaluated the performance of the FFQ against nutrient data from the diet records for servings of fruits & vegetables, servings of meats/eggs, fluid volume, sodium, oxalate, and calcium. Nutrient analysis was performed using the Nutrition Database System for Research software. Paired t-tests and Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated to determine the agreement between measures. RESULTS SFs (n=16) were 61±11 y and were 50% male. Fruit & vegetable intake and fluid intake correlated well with the diet records (R=0.57 and R=0.82, respectively; p<0.02 for both). Mean differences for calcium, sodium, and oxalate intakes were close: 73, 540, and 6 mg, respectively (median values, 161, 102, and 30 mg, respectively). However, within individuals, there was more variation. Using acceptable intake cutoffs, the difference between the 2 assessment methods was <300 mg for calcium intake for 44%, <50 mg for oxalate intake for 44%, and <25 mEq (575 mg) for sodium intake for 38% of SFs. SFs underreported meat intake on the FFQ by 3 servings/d (p=0.0001) as compared to their weighed diet records. Misinterpretation by some SFs of this particular FFQ category appeared to be a factor in individual variability. CONCLUSIONS We previously developed and piloted a FFQ to assess SFs' dietary intake. In this study, we compared the dietary intakes of SFs using the "gold standard" diet assessment measure: weighed, multiple-day diet records. Our results show that the FFQ performs strongly with respect to fruits & vegetables and for fluid intake. Final modification is underway, with larger numbers of SFs, to further improve the instrument for all food categories and to determine whether mode of administration affects results. © 2014FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 191Issue 4SApril 2014Page: e185 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2014MetricsAuthor Information Margaret Wertheim More articles by this author Rachel Bell More articles by this author Kristina L. Penniston More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...