Search

Background: Chickpeas are an affordable and nutrient-dense legume, but there is limited United States data on consumption patterns and the relationship between chickpea consumption and dietary intakes., Objectives: This study examined trends and sociodemographic patterns among chickpea consumers and the relationship between chickpea consumption and dietary intake., Methods: Adults consuming chickpeas or chickpea-containing foods on 1 or both of the 24-h dietary recalls were categorized as chickpea consumers. Data from NHANES 2003-2018 were used to evaluate trends and sociodemographic patterns in chickpea consumption (n = 35,029). The association between chickpea consumption and dietary intakes was compared to other legume consumers and nonlegume consumers from 2015-2018 (n = 8,342)., Results: The proportion of chickpea consumers increased from 1.9% in 2003-2006 to 4.5% in 2015-2018 (P value for trend < 0.001). This trend was consistent across age group, sex, race/ethnicity, education, and income. In 2015-2018, chickpea consumption was highest among individuals with higher incomes (2.4% among those with incomes <185% of the federal poverty guideline compared with 6.4% with incomes ≥300%), education levels (1.0% for less than high school compared with 10.2% for college graduates), physical activity levels (1.9% for no physical activity compared with 7.7% for ≥430 min of moderate-equivalent physical activity per week), and those with better self-reported health (1.7% fair/poor compared with 6.5% for excellent/very good, P-trend < 0.001 for each). Chickpea consumers had greater intakes of whole grains (1.48 oz/d for chickpea consumers compared with 0.91 for nonlegume consumers) and nuts/seeds (1.47 compared with 0.72 oz/d), less intake of red meat (0.96 compared with 1.55 oz/d), and higher Healthy Eating Index scores (62.1 compared with 51.2) compared with both nonlegume and other legume consumers (P value < 0.05 for each)., Conclusions: Chickpea consumption among United States adults has doubled between 2003 and 2018, yet intake remains low. Chickpea consumers have higher socioeconomic status and better health status, and their overall diets are more consistent with a healthy dietary pattern., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The United States' National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Adult Treatment Panel III and the Canadian Working Group on Hypercholesterolemia and Other Dyslipidemias (CWG) have each issued guidelines for the treatment of dyslipidemia., Objective: The present analysis compared the percentage of patients reaching target lipid levels according to NCEP and CWG guidelines among participants of the NCEP Evaluation ProjecT Utilizing Novel E-technology (NEPTUNE) II, a survey performed in the United States., Methods: American physicians who were high prescribers of lipid-modifying medications (n=376) each enrolled 10 to 20 consecutive patients from February to September 2003. Medical information, laboratory measurements and treatment plans associated with a single office visit were entered into a personal digital assistant and uploaded to a central database via the Internet., Results: Under both sets of guidelines, treatment success was strongly related to risk category (P<0.001). Treatment goal achievement in the low-risk (zero or one risk factor) and moderate-risk (two or more risk factors) categories was not substantially different between NCEP and CWG guidelines; however, in the high-risk category (coronary artery disease [CAD] and risk equivalents [RE]), CWG treatment goals were met less frequently than NCEP goals. NCEP combined low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol treatment goals were met by 39% of hypertriglyceridemic patients (27% in the CAD + CAD RE category). CWG combined low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and total cholesterol/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio treatment goals were met by 38% of hypertriglyceridemic patients (19% in the CAD + CAD RE category)., Conclusions: These data indicate substantial underachievement of treatment goals by patients at high risk under both the CWG and NCEP guidelines. The lower frequency of treatment success in high-risk patients according to the CWG definition indicates that more aggressive treatment is needed to reach CWG goals.