Prevalence and factors associated with regular fast-food consumption among adults in the UAE: a cross-sectional study

Le résumé fourni par la source

Abstract Objectives: To assess the prevalence and identify sociodemographic predictors of regular fast-food consumption (R-FFC) among United Arab Emirates (UAE) adults to inform public health nutrition responses to growing diet-related ill health in the region. Design: This is a descriptive cross-sectional study using purposive, convenience sampling. Data were collected using an online survey adapted from two validated surveys and distributed via social media platforms. R-FFC was defined as visiting a fast-food restaurant to eat ≥ 2 times/week. Pearson’s χ 2 tests and multiple binary logistic regression models were used to investigate prevalence and predictors of R-FFC. All statistical significance was considered at P -value < 0·05. Setting: Community, adults living in the UAE. Participants: UAE residents, ≥ 18 years, who consumed fast food ≥ once during the previous month. Results: Totally, 320 respondents met the inclusion criteria (age = mean 23·7 ( sd 7·7) years). The prevalence of R-FFC was 46·6 %. Based on results from the regression model, predictors of R-FFC were being female (AOR 2·47; 95 % CI 1·06, 5·79), married (AOR 3·11; 95 % CI 1·25, 7·77), BMI ≥ 25·0 (AOR 2·09; 95 % CI 1·10, 4·00) and residing outside Abu Dhabi (AOR 32·79; 95 % CI 12·06, 89·16). None of the remaining variables reached statistical significance. Taste was the most common reason for FFC (56·9 %), followed by convenience (21·6 %). Regular fast-food consumers were more likely to ‘super-size’ meals ( P = 0·011), eat alone ( P = 0·009) and not have regular meal patterns ( P = 0·004). Conclusions: The study revealed a high prevalence of R-FFC among UAE adults, and novel cultural predictors and characteristics of FFC in this context, highlighting the importance of socially and culturally informed research and public health strategies in this region.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.