Bowl-Based Meal Plan versus Food Exchange-Based Meal Plan for Dietary Intake Control in Korean Type 2 Diabetic Patients.
10.4093/kdj.2009.33.2.155
- Author:
Hee Jung AHN
1
;
Boo Kyung KOO
;
Ji Yeon JUNG
;
Hwi Ryun KWON
;
Hyun Jin KIM
;
Kang Seo PARK
;
Kyung Ah HAN
;
Kyung Wan MIN
Author Information
1. Diabetes Center, Eulji Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Diabetic diet;
Education;
Type 2 diabetes mellitus
- MeSH:
Compliance;
Comprehension;
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2;
Diet, Diabetic;
Diet Records;
Energy Intake;
Humans;
Meals;
Patient Compliance
- From:Korean Diabetes Journal
2009;33(2):155-163
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: The food exchange-based meal plan is effective in controlling dietary energy intake with a macronutrient balance. However, it is difficult to practice for relatively low-literacy patients. As an alternative, we developed a system employing a standardized-sized bowl and investigated its effectiveness on achieving proper energy intake and macronutrient composition and patient compliance, compared to the conventional food exchange system in Korean type 2 diabetes patients. METHODS: Eighty subjects with type 2 diabetes were assigned to both the novel bowl-based meal plan group (BG) and the food exchange-based meal plan group (ExG). BG received limited simple instructions for the plan. Time spent for plan instruction was 10 min for BG and 40 min for ExG. Dietary energy and macronutrient intake were estimated with 3-day dietary records and patient comprehension of the plan was estimated with a 5-point Likert scale. RESULTS: After 12 weeks, dietary energy compliance showed no difference between the groups (BG: 103 +/- 10%, ExG: 101 +/- 17%). Both groups showed significant reduction in carbohydrate and protein intake and there was no difference in the proportion of carbohydrate, protein and fat in energy intake between the groups despite the shorter instruction time for BG. Following the instruction period, there was no difference in the understanding score between the groups. CONCLUSION: This bowl-based plan was equally effective as the food exchange-based plan in controlling dietary energy intake and macronutrient composition, as well as patient comprehension and compliance. Our novel plan may allow for more cost-effective methods in terms of time needed for plan instruction.
