(PO13-01-22) The Influence of a Nutrition Recommendation on Food Choices in a Virtual Fast-Food Restaurant

The ePoster content is available to NUTRITION 2022 LIVE ONLINE attendees who are logged in.<br><br>If you are registered, log in and then come back here to use this button.

Presenting Author(s)

JH

James Hollis, PhD
– Associate Professor, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, United States

Co-Author(s)

AA

Ashley Alert, BS
– Graduate Student, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, United States
LL

Lorraine Lanningham_Foster, PhD
– Iowa State University
MW

Maren Wolff, PhD
– Iowa State University

Disclosure(s):

James Hollis, PhD: No relevant financial relationship(s) with ineligible companies to disclose.

Objectives: Food from fast-food restaurants (FFR) is typically high in calories, saturated fat, sugars, and sodium, while being low in whole grains, fruits, and vegetables. Improving choices made when purchasing food at FFR could improve diet and reduce the risk of chronic disease. The RAND Corporation developed performance standards for eating at restaurants that involves limiting calories, saturated fat, trans fat, total sugars, sweetened beverages, sodium and increasing fruit and vegetable intake. This study used a virtual fast-food restaurant to assess the effect of providing participants with a goal of selecting a meal of 700kcal compared to free-choice on nutrient intake, cost, expected satiety and expected palatability.

Methods: Fifty-eight students were randomly assigned to the intervention (700kcal) or control (free-choice) group. Participants wore an immersive virtual reality headset to experience being in a fast-food restaurant. They were asked to rate the palatability and expected satiety of items on the menu before ordering a meal. After they ordered the meal, the participants were asked to rate the palatability and expected satiety of the meal. The time taken to order was also measured.

Results: In the 700kcal treatment participants chose a meal that was lower in energy (1300 v 770kcal; p=0.001), total fat (55g v 34g, p=0.01), total CHO (151g v 88g, p=0.0006), total sugars (73g v 22g, p=0.02). There was no significant difference for saturated Fat (14.8g v 8 g, p=0.08), cholesterol (120mg v 65mg, p=0.1), fiber (7g v 6g, p=0.1), protein (43g v 27g, p=0.06) or sodium (1767mg v 1125mg, p=0.06). The cost of the meal was lower ($9.67 v $6.19; p-0.0003) and there was no difference in the time taken to order (51.7 v 52.9 seconds, p=0.28), rated palatability of the selected meal (82mm v 67mm, p=0.054). Expected satiety of the restricted meal was lower (100mm v 79mm, p=0.006).

Conclusions: These preliminary results suggest that individuals who select a meal based on a target of 700kcal have improved nutrient intakes. In addition, there is a reduction in cost of the meal. The participants rated the meals to be of similar palatability but there was a reduction in expected satiety which may lead to compensatory eating.

Funding Sources: None