Consumption of Dietary Supplements among Working-Age Residents of Lithuania in the Period from 2021 to 2023
Department of Public Health, Institute of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, M. K. Čiurlionio 21/27, 03101 Vilnius, Lithuania
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Medicina 2024, 60(4), 669; https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina60040669
Submission received: 21 March 2024
/
Revised: 10 April 2024
/
Accepted: 18 April 2024
/
Published: 19 April 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Epidemiology & Public Health)
Abstract
:Background and Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the consumption of dietary supplements (DS) among working-age residents of Lithuania from 2021 to 2023 with respect to social and demographic factors and an assessment of personal health. Materials and Methods: Using stratified sampling techniques, this study included three samples of working-age residents (1600 each year, 4800 total). Three surveys were conducted, the distribution of the respondents between groups was compared using the χ2 test. Results: The consumption of DS significantly differed each year and accounted for 78.1%, 71.6%, and 72.7% of the respondents, respectively (p < 0.05). In 2022, the prevalence of the consumption of DS was lower in the majority of social and demographic groups (p < 0.05). In 2023, it was higher among females, younger residents, and those from larger families, who suffered from COVID-19 (p < 0.05). Despite similar changes found in the consumption of DS among those who negatively assessed their health, this group showed more prevalent consumption of DS among residents with non-university education, unemployed respondents, and those with lower income (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Despite a significantly lower prevalence in the consumption of DS in 2022, it was higher again in 2023. The assessment of personal health shows different habits in the consumption of DS.
1. Introduction
When nutrition does not meet recommendations, dietary supplements may help correct micronutrient deficiency and maintain adequate intake [1]. On the other hand, overconsumption of dietary supplements should be avoided because of possible adverse health effects [2], especially those triggered by food supplements purchased illegally [3]. However, researchers bring to light a lack of awareness of these products observed among their consumers [3,4]. Major determinants of the consumption of dietary supplements include not only personal factors such as sociodemographic characteristics, older age, perceived benefits of dietary supplements, the history of illness, physiological conditions, and lifestyle factors, but also socio-economic factors like subjective norms, the price of food, and commercial considerations of the sectors involved in the production and sale of dietary supplements [2,5]. Attention should be drawn to the fact that dietary supplements are most commonly taken by people with no clinical signs or symptoms of deficiency [1], especially those with an interest in physical performance. Moreover, consumers of dietary supplements tend to have a better overall diet quality with their nutrient intake from foods that most commonly meet the recommended intake levels [1,6,7].
Multiple studies have shown that the COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on the prevalence of the consumption of dietary supplements [8,9,10,11]. Even though some of them revealed an increase in consumption [8,9,10], there were studies highlighting a decrease in the prevalence of the consumption of dietary supplements [11]. In addition to this, it was found that during the COVID-19 pandemic, the perceptions of dietary supplements changed. If, before the pandemic, dietary supplements were associated with healthcare and life cycle-related topics, for example, pregnancy, after the COVID-19 pandemic, consumer interests have shifted to disease prevention [12].
Despite the fact that sex, age, education, place of residence, marital status, number of family members, presence of children in the family, employment, income, COVID-19 cases in a family, and food selection criteria were analyzed as determinants of the nutritional habits and consumption of dietary supplements in previous studies, there is a lack of country-representative studies on the ongoing trends in the consumption of dietary supplements after the COVID-19 pandemic. There is an insufficient level of research carried on DS consumption among diverse social and demographic groups, especially among those with a negative assessment of personal health. After taking into account the inequalities in the consumption of dietary supplements and the occurrence of unequal changes in consumption during the COVID-19 pandemic [8], the aim of this study was to assess the consumption of dietary supplements among working-age residents of Lithuania in the period from 2021 to 2023 with respect to social and demographic factors and the assessment of personal health.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Procedure of Data Collection
The data for this study were collected after conducting three independent cross-sectional surveys in October and November of 2021, in October and November of 2022, and in October and November of 2023. A representative sample of adults aged 18 to 64 was formed each year. The multistage stratified probabilistic sampling method was used to select participants for this study. It ensured an equal probability for every household in the country to be surveyed, and, according to target criteria (sex, age, municipality, education, income, employment, marital status), the sample represented the general population of working-aged citizens of Lithuania. Data was collected by conducting an internet-based survey. Random samples of citizens were formed according to the Registry of Residents of Lithuania. Every selected resident received an invitation to participate in this study with a link to the anonymous questionnaire by email. The participants of this study filled out the questionnaire by themselves at a time that was convenient to them. It was possible to fill out the questionnaire only once. Only working-aged citizens of Lithuania were included in this study. This study did not include refugees and other people without Lithuanian citizenship.
Each of the samples independently included 1600 residents. The design of this study was not longitudinal. No data about the inclusion of the respondents in more than one sample were collected. In total, the answers of 4800 respondents are analyzed in this paper.
The comparison of the consumption of dietary supplements before the COVID-19 pandemic with the data collected during the first survey in 2021 has already been published [8]. The current paper focuses on the post-pandemic period and the analysis of the prevalence of the consumption of dietary supplements with respect to the subjective assessment of personal health, which had not been covered in our previous paper.
This study was reviewed by the Vilnius Regional Ethics Committee for Biomedical Research.
2.2. Description of the Questionnaire
Each of the three surveys was carried out using the same questionnaire with a minimal adaptation for the post-pandemic period. An anonymous questionnaire included questions about the social and demographic characteristics of the respondents, the COVID-19 cases in respondents’ families or among friends, their subjective assessment of personal health, nutrition, consumption of food supplements and physical activity. The questionnaire was formed on the basis of the previously used questionnaire about nutrition and consumption of food supplements [13]. In this paper, we present the analysis of the questions included in the questionnaire (Table 1).
Two of the questions regarding the respondents’ age and place of residence were open-ended. To achieve an unambiguous interpretation of the results, we transformed them into a binary format. Respondents were asked to identify the municipality they live in. Respondents from 5 municipalities with the largest number of residents were assigned to the “City” group, while the remaining respondents were attributed to the “Towns and villages” group. The age was categorized by median to the range up to 41-year-olds and from 42-year-olds. All other questions were closed. Respondents with primary or secondary education and high school graduates were assigned to the “Non-university education” group. Respondents with unfinished or finished university studies were assigned to the “University education” group. In terms of employment status, the “Employed” and “Unemployed” groups were created. Heads of companies or departments, office workers, civil servants, service sector employees, sellers, workers, and farmers were assigned to the “Employed” group. Retirees, housewives, persons on parental leave, non-employed persons and students were categorized into the “Unemployed” group. The variable representing an income per member of a family was transformed into a binary format with “Higher income” and “Lower income” categories. With respect to a salary increase, the cut-off point for those groups was 350 EUR in 2021, 400 EUR in 2022, and 470 EUR in 2023. In addition to this, more binary variables were created, such as the number of family members, marital status, and children under 18 years old. The categorization of the rest of the questionnaire is presented in Table 2.
2.3. Statistical Analysis
The normality of the variable representing the age of respondents in general samples was tested using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test with Lilliefors significance correction. This test showed non-normal distributions. Therefore, medians with an interquartile range (Q1–Q3) were presented for this variable. The Pearson’s chi-squared test (χ2) was used to determine whether there was a statistically significant difference between the expected frequencies and the observed frequencies in one or more of the categories. Differences were considered statistically significant when the p-value was lower than 0.05.
3. Results
In total, this study included 4800 respondents: 1600 in 2021, 1600 in 2022 and 1600 in 2023. The median age in the samples collected in 2021 and 2022 was 42 (29–54) years, while in the sample of 2023 it was 43 (30–54) years. The majority of the respondents were employed, married (or with partners), from small towns or villages, with university education, and without children under 18 years old. The samples were similar in terms of sex, age, education, type of place of residence, children under 18 years old, employment status, income, and the subjective assessment of personal health (p > 0.05). The sample collected in 2022 compared to that in 2021 included relatively more single respondents and those who selected foods following other than strengthening health criteria (p < 0.05). In comparison to the 2022 sample, the 2023 sample included relatively more married (or with partners) respondents and those who selected foods with the aim of strengthening of their health (p < 0.05). The distribution of the respondents by social and demographic factors is presented in Table 2.
In 2021, the consumption of dietary supplements was prevalent among 1240 (78.1%) respondents. In 2022, the prevalence of the consumption of dietary supplements significantly lowered and accounted for 1131 (71.6%) subjects (p < 0.001). In 2023, compared to 2022, a higher prevalence of the consumption of dietary supplements was observed: 1163 (72.7%) respondents indicated the consumption of dietary supplements (p = 0.044). Nevertheless, the distribution of the respondents by the majority of purposes for the consumption of dietary supplements remained similar (p > 0.05). The consumption of dietary supplements with the aim of protection against the COVID-19 infection in 2023 was significantly lower than in the previous years (p = 0.004) (Table 3).
The comparison of the prevalence of the consumption of dietary supplements between the three samples revealed the differences within all social and demographic groups (p < 0.05) except for the respondents with children under 18 years old, unemployed respondents, those with lower income, those who indicated health strengthening as the main criterion for the selection of foods, and those who suffered from the asymptomatic or mild form of COVID-19 (p > 0.05). In 2022, the lower prevalence of the consumption of dietary supplements was observed in almost all social and demographic groups: among males, females, employed, younger and older residents of Lithuania, those with and without university education, those from big and small municipalities, those with and without a partner, from families of at least two members, without children, with lower and higher income, those who selected their foods for other than health strengthening criteria, those with and without COVID-19 cases in their families, those who suffered from a severe form of COVID-19, and those who assessed their health positively or negatively (p < 0.05). In terms of the prevalence of the consumption of dietary supplements, the samples of 2021 and 2022 did not differ among the respondents of one-person families, those with children under 18 years old, those who suffered from the asymptomatic or mild form of COVID-19, and those who indicated health strengthening as the main criteria for the selection of foods (p > 0.05). In 2023, no difference in the prevalence of the consumption of dietary supplements was found within all social and demographic groups (p > 0.05), except for a higher prevalence among females, younger residents of Lithuania, those from families with two or more members, those who suffered from COVID-19, and those who suffered from a severe form of COVID-19 (p < 0.05) (Table 4).
In at least two of the samples, a higher prevalence of consumption of dietary supplements was observed among females, those with university education, those from larger municipalities, employed respondents, those with higher income, those who suffered from COVID-19, and those who indicated health strengthening as the main criteria for the selection of foods (p < 0.05) (Table 4).
The comparison of the prevalence of a negative assessment of personal health between the three samples revealed no difference (p > 0.05) within all the social and demographic groups except among females, residents from smaller municipalities, adults with lower income, and those who suffered from the asymptomatic or mild form of COVID-19 (p < 0.05). In 2022, a higher prevalence of a negative assessment of personal health was observed among employed respondents and those with lower income (p < 0.05). A lower prevalence was observed among those who suffered from the asymptomatic or mild form of COVID-19. In 2023, a higher prevalence of a negative assessment of personal health was observed among females and those who suffered from the asymptomatic or mild form of COVID-19 (p < 0.05) (Table 5).
In at least two of the samples, a higher prevalence of the negative assessment of personal health was observed among older, unemployed respondents, those with non-university education, without children, with lower income, and those who indicated other than health strengthening as the main criteria for selecting foods (p < 0.05) (Table 5).
After comparing the prevalence of the consumption of dietary supplements among those who negatively assessed their personal health between the three samples, the differences were observed among males, older, employed respondents, those with non-university education, without children, those from families consisting of two or more members, those who indicated health strengthening and other criteria as the main criteria when selecting foods, and those with various forms of COVID-19 (p < 0.05). Among those who negatively assessed their personal health in 2022, a significantly lower prevalence of the consumption of dietary supplements was observed among males, older, employed respondents, those with non-university education, residents from cities and smaller municipalities, those with and without a partner, those from families with two or more members, those with and without children under 18 years old, those who indicated other than health strengthening as the main criteria for the selection of foods, and those who suffered from a severe form of COVID-19 (p < 0.05). Among those who negatively assessed their personal health in 2023, no difference in the prevalence of the consumption of dietary supplements was found compared to the previous year (p > 0.05), except for a higher prevalence among those who suffered from a severe form of COVID-19 and those who indicated strengthening of health as the main criterion for the selection of foods (p < 0.05) (Table 6).
In at least two of the samples, among the respondents who assessed their health negatively, a higher prevalence of the consumption of dietary supplements was observed among older respondents, those with non-university education, unemployed respondents, those with lower income, those who suffered from a severe form of COVID-19, and those who indicated other than health strengthening as the main criteria for the selection of foods (p < 0.05) (Table 6).
In all three samples, the top six reasons for the consumption of dietary supplements among the respondents who assessed their health negatively were strengthening the immune system, the overall strengthening of the body, strengthening the cardiovascular system, strengthening the bones and joints, boosting the nervous system, and improving digestion. Except for the lower prevalence of the consumption of dietary supplements with the aim to strengthen the cardiovascular system in 2022 (p < 0.05), the distribution pattern of the respondents who assessed their health negatively by purpose for the consumption of dietary supplements was similar in all three samples (p > 0.05) (Table 7).
In all three samples, the consumption of dietary supplements for better digestion was more prevalent among those who assessed their health negatively in comparison to those who assessed their health positively (p < 0.05). This trend was also observed with dietary supplements for the regulation of sleep and boosting the nervous system in 2021 and 2022, as well as for strengthening the cardiovascular system in 2021 (p < 0.05). A lower prevalence of dietary supplements for the overall strengthening of the body among those who assessed their health negatively was observed in 2023 (p < 0.05). No association between the consumption of dietary supplements for other purposes and the subjective assessment of personal health was observed (p > 0.05) (Table 7).
The distribution of the respondents by the consumption of exact supplements was similar in 2022 and 2023. This was observed among the whole sample of consumers and in a subgroup of those who assessed their health negatively. The most prevalent dietary supplement was vitamin D. Moreover, highly prevalent were the complexes of vitamins and minerals: magnesium, vitamin C, omega-3 fatty acids, vitamins of the B group, and fish oil. Other dietary supplements were two or more times less prevalent (Table 8).
In 2022, among the respondents who assessed their health negatively, the consumption of B-group vitamins, other vitamins (other than those listed in Table 7), magnesium and potassium was higher than among those who assessed their health positively (p < 0.05). In 2022, the consumption of selenium was lower among those who assessed their health negatively (p < 0.05). In 2023, no association between the subjective assessment of personal health and the consumption of exact dietary supplements was observed (p > 0.05). Also, the distribution of the respondents who assessed their health negatively by the consumption of exact supplements was similar to that observed in 2022 (p > 0.05) (Table 8).
4. Discussion
This study revealed the change in the prevalence of the consumption of dietary supplements among the working-age residents of Lithuania in the period from 2021 to 2023, covering the end of the COVID-19 pandemic and two years later, including the period of the wide-scale war in Ukraine. The results of this study revealed changes in the consumption of dietary supplements in many social and demographic groups, as well as in a subgroup of those who negatively assessed their personal health. Taking into account such a period of time, to our knowledge, up to this date, this study is the first published country-representative study of this topic.
Our results revealed that the prevalence of the consumption of dietary supplements was significantly lower in 2022, after the COVID-19 pandemic, when a wide-scale war in Ukraine began. Results of the 2023 survey showed the stabilization of the prevalence of the consumption of dietary supplements and even a higher prevalence of consumption among females, younger residents of Lithuania, and those from families with at least two members. The post-pandemic decrease in the prevalence of the consumption of dietary supplements was expected in advance because a study conducted in Poland showed that the prevalence of consumption was likely to decrease during the third wave of the pandemic [9]. Despite the decrease, the prevalence of consumption in 2022 and 2023 was higher than in 2017 and 2019 [8,14].
Despite the lower prevalence of consumption of dietary supplements in 2022, our study revealed that there were several social and demographic groups where no significant changes in the prevalence of consumption of dietary supplements were observed. These included respondents from one-person families, those with children under 18 years old, and those who indicated health strengthening as the main criteria for the selection of foods. Other researchers emphasize additional factors, such as the Russian–Ukrainian war, that could impact nutrition in the post-pandemic period, which caused a socioeconomic crisis [15]. Socioeconomic factors, as shown in other studies, are important determinants for the consumption of dietary supplements [2].
Contrary to the findings of other researchers, our study revealed no significant difference in the prevalence of consumption of dietary supplements between those with positive and negative assessments of personal health [7]. The higher prevalence of the consumption of dietary supplements was observed only during the pandemic, in 2021, but not in the post-pandemic period. What is more, our study revealed opposite tendencies in the prevalence of consumption of dietary supplements among those with negative assessments of their personal health. While in the general population the prevalence was higher among females, those with university education, those from larger municipalities, employed residents, those with higher income, and those selecting foods with the aim of health strengthening, among the residents with negative assessment of their personal health, a higher prevalence in the consumption of dietary supplements was observed among older adults, those with non-university education, unemployed residents, those with lower income, and those selecting foods according to other than health strengthening criteria. These results seem to be contradictory to the findings of other researchers, who presented that lower socio-economic status is associated with more frequent inadequacy of dietary supplements [16]. Unfortunately, we were not able to assess the actual nutrition of the participants of our study; subsequently, we were not able to assess the adequacy of an intake of dietary supplements. Notably, the improvement of health [17,18,19], advertising [20], and other factors [2] are presented as important determinants for the consumption of dietary supplements by other researchers. However, concerns about the inadequate consumption of dietary supplements have been raised for quite some time [21].
Similar to our results, other studies also show a high prevalence of consumption of dietary supplements containing vitamin D, multivitamins, vitamin C, omega-3 fatty acids, probiotics, and zinc [22,23]. In our study, the prevalence of these dietary supplements was observed in the general samples also in the subgroups of respondents with a negative assessment of personal health. However, these subgroups presented several differences. Despite a few other mismatches, different from the general population, those with a negative assessment of their personal health more frequently selected dietary supplements for better digestion, regulation of sleep and boosting the nervous system. Despite the fact that only in 2021, a significantly higher prevalence of the consumption of dietary supplements for strengthening the cardiovascular system was observed among those with a negative assessment of their personal health, in 2022, such group of respondents more frequently consumed magnesium and potassium, as well as the B-group vitamins. These findings possibly show the necessity to adapt or specifically target nutrition education and health promotion interventions according to the assessment of personal health [24].
Limitations
We were able to assess only the subjective views of the respondents on the consumption of dietary supplements because of the cross-sectional design of the study. A longitudinal study would have allowed us to objectively assess the changes in consumption of dietary supplements at an individual level. In addition, this would have allowed us to use more advanced statistical methods to predict the change in the consumption of dietary supplements. On the other hand, this study included three country-representative samples, which were larger than sufficient to assess the consumption of dietary supplements among adult residents of Lithuania.
Also, in order to simplify the presentation and interpretation of the results, we converted the age-representing variable into binary. Despite the fact that it revealed some significant differences in the consumption of dietary supplements, in the upcoming studies, it would be beneficial to perform a more detailed analysis because such conversion might hide some subgroups that might significantly differ from each other.
Despite the fact that we analyzed the consumption of dietary supplements with respect to many social, demographic and health-related factors, there might be important factors that were not included in our analysis.
5. Conclusions
In comparison to 2021, among working-age Lithuanian residents, the prevalence of the consumption of dietary supplements was significantly lower in 2022, when the COVID-19 pandemic ended and a wide-scale war in Ukraine began, but in 2023 it was higher again. The lower prevalence was observed in most of the social and demographic groups, while a higher prevalence was observed among females, younger residents of Lithuania, and those from families with at least two members.
A negative assessment of personal health is associated with opposite tendencies in the prevalence of the consumption of dietary supplements in the general population. In terms of the general population, females, those with university education, those from larger municipalities, employed residents, those with higher income, and those selecting foods with the aim of health strengthening show a higher prevalence in the consumption of dietary supplements. Among the residents with negative assessments of their personal health, a higher prevalence in the consumption of dietary supplements is observed among older adults, those with non-university education, unemployed residents, those with lower income, and those selecting foods according to other than health strengthening criteria. Both, in the general population of the working-aged residents of Lithuania and among the residents with negative assessments of their personal health, residents without children under 18 years old, and those who suffered from a severe form of COVID-19 more frequently indicated the consumption of dietary supplements, while it did not differ with respect to the different marital status and number of family members.
The consumption prevalence of specific dietary supplements in the majority of cases does not differ between those with a negative or positive assessment of personal health. However, dietary supplements for strengthening the cardiovascular system, boosting the nervous system, regulating sleep, and improving digestion are more prevalent among those with a negative health assessment. This should be taken into account while preparing nutrition education and health promotion interventions.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, D.A., V.D. and R.S.; methodology, D.A., V.D. and R.S.; software, D.A.; validation, R.A., D.A., V.D. and R.S.; formal analysis, D.A., V.D. and R.S.; investigation, R.A. and D.A.; resources, R.S.; data curation, R.A. and D.A.; writing—original draft preparation, R.A. and D.A.; writing—review and editing, R.A. and D.A.; visualization, D.A.; supervision, R.S.; project administration, R.S.; funding acquisition, R.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement
This study was reviewed by the Vilnius Regional Ethics Committee for Biomedical Research. The authors received a confirmation that the study did not require approval of the Committee.
Informed Consent Statement
The participants were informed about the aim of the study and the data processing at Vilnius University. They gave their consent by voluntarily filling out the anonymous questionnaire. With respect to the fact that we collected anonymous, non-sensitive data, that we provided only aggregated results, and that the sample was large enough to ensure anonymity, signing an additional informed consent would have unreasonably increased the costs of the data collection.
Data Availability Statement
The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors on request.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interests.
References
- Zhang, F.F.; Barr, S.I.; McNulty, H.; Li, D.; Blumberg, J.B. Health effects of vitamin and mineral supplements. BMJ 2020, 369, m2511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hoseini, A.; Dehdari, T.; Solhi, M.; Rahideh, S.T.; Janani, L. Qualitative exploration of the factors influencing the use of dietary supplements in Iranian women: Introduction to areas of focus for developing interventions. Heliyon 2021, 7, e06672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wierzejska, R.E. Dietary Supplements—For Whom? The Current State of Knowledge about the Health Effects of Selected Supplement Use. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 8897. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kołodziej, G.; Cyran-Grzebyk, B.; Majewska, J.; Kołodziej, K. Knowledge Concerning Dietary Supplements among General Public. BioMed Res. Int. 2019, 2019, 9629531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bailey, R.L.; Dodd, K.W.; Gahche, J.J.; Dwyer, J.T.; Cowan, A.E.; Jun, S.; Eicher-Miller, H.A.; Guenther, P.M.; Bhadra, A.; Thomas, P.R.; et al. Best Practices for Dietary Supplement Assessment and Estimation of Total Usual Nutrient Intakes in Population-Level Research and Monitoring. J. Nutr. 2019, 149, 181–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bailey, R.L.; Fulgoni, V.L., 3rd; Keast, D.R.; Dwyer, J.T. Dietary supplement use is associated with higher intakes of minerals from food sources. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2011, 94, 1376–1381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Harrison, R.A.; Holt, D.; Pattison, D.J.; Elton, P.J. Are those in need taking dietary supplements? A survey of 21923 adults. Br. J. Nutr. 2004, 91, 617–623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arlauskas, R.; Austys, D.; Stukas, R. COVID-19 Pandemic and Consumption of Dietary Supplements among Adult Residents of Lithuania. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 9591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Puścion-Jakubik, A.; Bielecka, J.; Grabia, M.; Mielech, A.; Markiewicz-Żukowska, R.; Mielcarek, K.; Moskwa, J.; Naliwajko, S.K.; Soroczyńska, J.; Gromkowska-Kępka, K.J.; et al. Consumption of Dietary supplements during the Three COVID-19 Waves in Poland—Focus on Zinc and Vitamin D. Nutrients 2021, 13, 3361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grebrow, J. Peak Dietary Supplement Sales Leveling off during COVID-19 Pandemic, but Growth Still Remains Strong over Last Year, Marker Researchers Report during Webcast. Nutr. Outlook 2020. Available online: https://www.nutritionaloutlook.com/view/peak-dietary-supplement-sales-leveling-during-covid-19-pandemic-growth-still-remains-strong (accessed on 30 June 2023).
- Monroe-Lord, L.; Harrison, E.; Ardakani, A.; Duan, X.; Spechler, L.; Jeffery, T.D.; Jackson, P. Changes in Food Consumption Trends among American Adults since the COVID-19 Pandemic. Nutrients 2023, 15, 1769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, E.; Jung, H.S.; Jang, J.A. Consumers’ perceptions of dietary supplements before and after the COVID-19 pandemic based on big data. J. Nutr. Health 2023, 56, 330–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stukas, R.; Arlauskas, R.; Butikis, M.; Dobrovolskij, V. Dietary supplements usage among Lithuanian residents in 2019. Visuom. Sveik. 2019, 4, 75–79. [Google Scholar]
- Stukas, R.; Dobrovolskij, V. Food supplements usage and opinion about food supplements among Lithuanian residents. Visuom. Sveik. 2018, 2, 64–68. [Google Scholar]
- Galanakis, C.M. The “Vertigo” of the Food Sector within the Triangle of Climate Change, the Post-Pandemic World, and the Russian-Ukrainian War. Foods 2023, 12, 721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Blumberg, J.B.; Frei, B.; Fulgoni, V.L.; Weaver, C.M.; Zeisel, S.H. Contribution of Dietary Supplements to Nutritional Adequacy by Socioeconomic Subgroups in Adults of the United States. Nutrients 2018, 10, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Soukiasian, P.-D.; Kyrana, Z.; Gerothanasi, K.; Kiranas, E.; Kokokiris, L.E. Prevalence, Determinants, and Consumer Stance towards Dietary Supplements According to Sex in a Large Greek Sample: A Cross-Sectional Study. Nutrients 2022, 14, 5131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bailey, R.L.; Gahche, J.J.; Miller, P.E.; Thomas, P.R.; Dwyer, J.T. Why US Adults Use Dietary Supplements. JAMA Intern. Med. 2013, 173, 355–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sicinska, E.; Madej, D.; Szmidt, M.K.; Januszko, O.; Kaluza, J. Dietary Supplement Use in Relation to Socio-Demographic and Lifestyle Factors, including Adherence to Mediterranean-Style Diet in University Students. Nutrients 2022, 14, 2745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Karbownik, M.S.; Paul, E.; Nowicka, M.; Nowicka, Z.; Kowalczyk, R.P.; Kowalczyk, E.; Pietras, T. Knowledge about dietary supplements and trust in advertising them: Development and validation of the questionnaires and preliminary results of the association between the constructs. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0218398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dickinson, A.; MacKay, D.; Wong, A. Consumer attitudes about the role of multivitamins and other dietary supplements: Report of a survey. Nutr. J. 2015, 14, 66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Louca, P.; Murray, B.; Klaser, K.; Graham, M.S.; Mazidi, M.; Leeming, E.R.; Thompson, E.; Bowyer, R.; Drew, D.A.; Nguyen, N.H.; et al. Modest effects of dietary supplements during the COVID-19 pandemic: Insights from 445 850 users of the COVID-19 Symptom Study app. BMJ Nutr. Prev. Health 2021, 4, e000250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Papatesta, E.M.; Kanellou, A.; Peppa, E.; Trichopoulou, A. Is Dietary (Food) Supplement Intake Reported in European National Nutrition Surveys? Nutrients 2023, 15, 5090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Moore, G.; Campbell, M.; Copeland, L.; Craig, P.; Movsisyan, A.; Hoddinott, P.; Littlecott, H.; O’Cathain, A.; Pfadenhauer, L.; Rehfuess, E.; et al. Adapting interventions to new contexts—The ADAPT guidance. BMJ 2021, 374, n1679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Table 1.
Questions about the consumption of dietary supplements included in this study.
| Question | Categories with Relevant Response Options * |
|---|---|
| Do you consume dietary supplements (vitamins, minerals, polyunsaturated fatty acids, plant-based preparations, etc.)? | Yes (yes, always/yes, more than 6 months per year/yes, 4–6 months per year/yes, 2–3 months per year/yes, 1 month per year/yes, but shortly or accidentally) No (no, I do not consume) Excluded from the analysis (I do not know/cannot answer) |
| What dietary supplements and what for have you taken over the last 12 months? ** | For strengthening the immune system For disease prevention and the overall strengthening of the body/For energy boosting/For eye care/For boosting memory/For boosting the nervous system/For strengthening the cardiovascular system/For strengthening the joints, bones/For better digestion For sleep regulation/For athletes/For weight regulation/For protection against the COVID-19 infection/Other |
| What is the most important for you when selecting food products? | Health strengthening (Benefits to health) Other (Taste/Price/Preferences of other family members/The necessity of diet/Other) Excluded from the analysis (I do not know/cannot answer) |
| Which of the dietary supplements have you consumed/taken over the last 12 months? (the question used only in the 2022 and 2023 surveys) ** | Complex of vitamins and minerals/Complex of vitamins/Complex of minerals/Omega-3 fatty acids/Fish oil/Plant-based/Targeted at the immune system/Targeted at the cardiovascular system/Targeted at the nervous system/Targeted at the general strengthening of the body/Vitamin C/Vitamin D/Vitamin A/Vitamins of the B group/Folic acid/Other vitamins/Iron/Magnesium/Potassium/Calcium/Zinc/Selenium/Other minerals/Coenzyme Q10/Probiotics/Other/I do not know |
| How would you assess your health? | Positively (Very good/Rather good/Neither good nor bad) Negatively (Rather bad/Very bad) Excluded from the analysis (I do not know/cannot answer) |
| *** Please select the appropriate statements for you: (Level of exposure to COVID-19) ** | I am suffering (or suffered) from COVID-19/There is (or was) a member in my family who is suffering (or suffered) from COVID-19/My friends, acquaintances, neighbors are suffering (or suffered) from COVID-19 in their families/I do not know anyone who is suffering (or suffered) from COVID-19 |
| Please select the most appropriate statement about your COVID-19 infection: | Suffered from the asymptomatic or mild form of COVID-19 (I had an asymptomatic form of this disease/I had a mild form of this disease)/Suffered from a severe COVID-19 form (I had a severe form of this disease/I had a very severe form of this disease) |
* In case of larger categories, the response options are provided in brackets; ** Selection of multiple answer options available; ***—in 2023, the respondents were asked to indicate the exposure to COVID-19 over the last 12 months while in the previous surveys such period of time was not defined.
Table 2.
Distribution of the respondents by social and demographic factors.
| Factor | Sample of 2021 | Sample of 2022 | Sample of 2023 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | Relative Frequency (%) | N | Relative Frequency (%) | N | Relative Frequency (%) | |
| Consumption of dietary supplements | 1587 | 1579 | 1573 | |||
| Yes | 1240 | 78.1 | 1131 | 71.6 | 1163 | 72.7 |
| No | 347 | 21.9 | 448 | 28.4 | 410 | 27.3 |
| Sex | 1600 | 1600 | 1600 | |||
| Male | 792 | 49.5 | 800 | 50.0 | 785 | 49.0 |
| Female | 808 | 50.5 | 800 | 50.0 | 815 | 51.0 |
| Age | 1600 | 1600 | 1600 | |||
| 41 years old or younger | 769 | 48.1 | 784 | 49.0 | 753 | 47.1 |
| 42 years old or older | 831 | 51.9 | 816 | 51.0 | 847 | 52.9 |
| Education | 1484 | 1495 | 1506 | |||
| Non-university education | 474 | 31.9 | 495 | 33.1 | 465 | 30.9 |
| University education | 1010 | 68.1 | 1000 | 66.9 | 1041 | 69.1 |
| Place of residence | 1600 | 1600 | 1600 | |||
| City | 678 | 42.4 | 686 | 42.9 | 670 | 41.9 |
| A small town or village | 922 | 57.6 | 914 | 57.1 | 930 | 58.1 |
| Marital status * | 1600 | 1600 | 1600 | |||
| Single | 636 | 39.8 | 644 | 40.2 | 508 | 31.8 |
| Married | 964 | 60.2 | 956 | 59.8 | 1092 ^ | 68.2 ^ |
| Number of family members | 1600 | 1600 | 1600 | |||
| Two or more | 1408 | 88.0 | 1370 | 85.6 | 1369 | 85.6 |
| One | 192 | 12.0 | 230 ^ | 14.4 ^ | 231 | 14.4 |
| With children under 18 years old | 1600 | 1600 | 1600 | |||
| No | 991 | 61.9 | 967 | 60.4 | 990 | 61.9 |
| Yes | 609 | 38.1 | 633 | 39.6 | 610 | 38.1 |
| Employment | 1494 | 1471 | 1480 | |||
| Employed | 1174 | 78.6 | 1135 | 77.1 | 1139 | 76.9 |
| Unemployed | 321 | 21.4 | 336 | 22.9 | 341 | 23.1 |
| Income | 1248 | 1226 | 1275 | |||
| Lower | 412 | 33.0 | 437 | 35.7 | 409 | 32.1 |
| Higher | 836 | 67.0 | 789 | 64.3 | 866 | 67.9 |
| Food selection criteria * | 1569 | 1541 | 1576 | |||
| Health strengthening | 489 | 31.1 | 286 | 18.5 | 381 ^ | 24.2 ^ |
| Other | 1081 | 68.9 | 1256 ^ | 81.5 ^ | 1195 | 75.8 |
| COVID-19 among family members | 1600 | 1600 | 1600 | |||
| There were no COVID-19 cases in the respondent’s family | 970 | 60.6 | 393 | 24.6 | 1031 | 64.5 |
| The respondent or his/her family members suffered from COVID-19 | 630 | 39.4 | 1207 | 75.4 | 569 | 35.5 |
| Severeness of COVID-19 | 343 | 385 | 385 | |||
| Suffered from the asymptomatic or mild form of COVID-19 | 264 | 77.1 | 293 | 76.2 | 287 | 74.4 |
| Suffered from a severe form of COVID-19 | 78 | 22.9 | 92 | 23.8 | 99 | 25.6 |
| Subjective assessment of health status | 1587 | 1569 | 1570 | |||
| Negative | 115 | 7.3 | 136 | 8.7 | 151 | 9.6 |
| Positive | 1472 | 92.7 | 1433 | 91.3 | 1419 | 90.4 |
* a significant difference (p < 0.05) between all the three samples (2021, 2022 and 2023); ^ a significantly higher prevalence (p < 0.05) compared to the sample collected one year before (2021 vs. 2022, 2022 vs. 2023).
Table 3.
Distribution of the respondents by purpose for the consumption of food supplements and the consumption within the past 12 months in the three samples.
Table 3.
Distribution of the respondents by purpose for the consumption of food supplements and the consumption within the past 12 months in the three samples.
| The Purpose for the Consumption of Dietary Supplements | Sample of 2021 | Sample of 2022 | Sample of 2023 | p-Value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | Relative Frequency, % | N | Relative Frequency, % | N | Relative Frequency, % | ||
| Strengthening the immune system | 607 | 49.1 | 546 | 48.5 | 530 | 45.6 | 0.187 |
| The overall strengthening of the body | 539 | 43.6 | 453 | 40.3 | 483 | 41.5 | 0.257 |
| Energy boosting | 171 | 13.8 | 170 | 15.1 | 166 | 14.3 | 0.667 |
| Eye care | 163 | 13.2 | 165 | 14.7 | 173 | 14.9 | 0.428 |
| Boosting memory | 134 | 10.8 | 140 | 12.5 | 128 | 11.0 | 0.409 |
| Boosting the nervous system | 291 | 23.5 | 262 | 23.3 | 289 | 24.8 | 0.637 |
| Strengthening the cardiovascular system | 333 | 26.9 | 279 | 24.8 | 314 | 27 | 0.398 |
| Strengthening the joints, bones | 310 | 25.1 | 260 | 23.1 | 301 | 25.9 | 0.289 |
| Better digestion | 202 | 16.3 | 167 | 14.8 | 180 | 15.5 | 0.606 |
| Regulation of sleep | 120 | 9.7 | 133 | 11.8 | 147 | 12.6 | 0.063 |
| For athletics | 69 | 5.6 | 49 | 4.4 | 49 | 4.2 | 0.222 |
| Reduction/control of body weight | 93 | 7.5 | 68 | 6.0 | 73 | 6.3 | 0.297 |
| Protection against the COVID-19 infection * | 63 | 5.1 | 47 | 4.2 | 24 @ | 2.1 @ | <0.001 |
| Other | 86 | 6.9 | 84 | 7.5 | 90 | 7.7 | 0.755 |
| Total | 1237 | 1124 | 1163 | ||||
* a significant difference (p < 0.05) between all the three samples (2021, 2022 and 2023); @ a significantly lower prevalence (p < 0.05) compared to the sample collected one year before (2021 vs. 2022, 2022 vs. 2023).
Table 4.
Distribution of the respondents who indicated the consumption of dietary supplements by social and demographic factors in the three samples.
Table 4.
Distribution of the respondents who indicated the consumption of dietary supplements by social and demographic factors in the three samples.
| Factor | Sample of 2021 | Sample of 2022 | Sample of 2023 | p-Value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | % | N | % | N | % | ||
| Sex | 1237 | 1124 | 1162 | ||||
| Male * | 590 b | 47.7 b | 529 b@ | 47.1 b@ | 521 b | 44.8 b | 0.002 |
| Female * | 647 a | 52.3 a | 595 a@ | 52.9 a@ | 641 a^ | 55.2 a^ | 0.018 |
| Age | 1237 | 1124 | 1163 | ||||
| 41 years old or younger * | 580 | 46.9 | 530 b@ | 47.2 b@ | 560 ^a | 48.2 ^a | 0.002 |
| 42 years old or older * | 657 | 53.1 | 594 a@ | 52.8 a@ | 603 b | 51.8 b | 0.001 |
| Education | 1166 | 1065 | 1101 | ||||
| Non-university education * | 350 b | 30.0 b | 309 b@ | 29.0 b@ | 306 b | 27.8 b | 0.002 |
| University education * | 816 a | 70.0 a | 756 a@ | 71.0 a@ | 795 a | 72.2 a | 0.013 |
| Place of residence | 1238 | 1124 | 1163 | ||||
| City * | 546 a | 44.1 a | 507 a@ | 45.1 a@ | 515 a | 44.3 a | 0.025 |
| A small town or village * | 692 b | 55.9 b | 617 b@ | 54.9 b@ | 648 b | 55.7 b | 0.005 |
| Marital status | 1238 | 1124 | 1163 | ||||
| Single * | 500 | 40.4 | 449 @ | 39.9 @ | 361 | 31.0 | 0.004 |
| Married * | 738 | 59.6 | 675 @ | 60.1 @ | 802 | 69.0 | 0.020 |
| Number of family members | 1237 | 1124 | 1163 | ||||
| Two or more * | 1080 | 87.3 | 950 @ | 84.5 @ | 1002 ^ | 86.2 ^ | <0.001 |
| One * | 157 | 12.7 | 174 | 15.5 | 161 | 13.8 | 0.024 |
| With children under 18 years old | 1237 | 1124 | 1162 | ||||
| No * | 782 a | 63.2 a | 685 @ | 60.9 @ | 710 | 61.1 | <0.001 |
| Yes | 455 b | 36.8 b | 439 | 39.1 | 452 | 38.9 | 0.209 |
| Employment | 1162 | 1046 | 1082 | ||||
| Employed * | 935 a | 80.5 a | 824 a@ | 78.8 a@ | 841 | 77.7 | 0.001 |
| Unemployed | 227 b | 19.5 b | 222 b | 21.2 b | 241 | 22.3 | 0.311 |
| Income | 975 | 861 | 930 | ||||
| Lower | 306 b | 31.4 b | 289 b@ | 33.6 b@ | 285 | 30.6 | 0.095 |
| Higher * | 669 a | 68.6 a | 572 a@ | 66.4 a@ | 645 | 69.4 | 0.002 |
| Food selection criteria | 1221 | 1102 | 1152 | ||||
| Health strengthening | 399 a | 32.7 a | 221 a | 20.1 a | 311 a | 27.0 a | 0.181 |
| Other * | 822 b | 67.3 b | 881 b@ | 79.9 b@ | 841 b | 73.0 b | 0.009 |
| COVID-19 among family members | 1240 | 1131 | 1163 | ||||
| There were no COVID-19 cases in the respondent’s family * | 738 | 59.5 | 259 b@ | 22.9 b@ | 726 b | 62.4 b | 0.001 |
| The respondent or his/her family members suffered from COVID-19 * | 502 | 40.5 | 872 a@ | 77.1 a@ | 437 a^ | 37.6 a^ | <0.001 |
| Severeness of COVID-19 | 267 | 276 | 301 | ||||
| Suffered from the asymptomatic or mild form of COVID-19 | 200 | 74.9 | 214 | 77.5 | 216 b | 71.8 b | 0.720 |
| Suffered from a severe form of COVID-19 * | 67 | 25.1 | 62 @ | 22.5 @ | 85 a^ | 28.2 a^ | 0.003 |
| Subjective assessment of health status | 1237 | 1124 | 1163 | ||||
| Negative * | 100 a | 8.1 a | 98 @ | 8.7 @ | 117 | 10.1 | 0.021 |
| Positive * | 1137 b | 91.9 b | 1026 @ | 91.3 @ | 1046 | 89.9 | 0.003 |
* a significant difference (p < 0.05) between all the three samples (2021, 2022 and 2023); ^ a significantly higher prevalence (p < 0.05) compared to the sample collected one year before (2021 vs. 2022, 2022 vs. 2023); @ a significantly lower prevalence (p < 0.05) compared to the sample collected one year before (2021 vs. 2022, 2022 vs. 2023); a—a significantly higher prevalence within the sample (p < 0.05); b—a significantly lower prevalence within the sample (p < 0.05).
Table 5.
Distribution of the respondents who assessed their health negatively and social and demographic factors in the three samples.
Table 5.
Distribution of the respondents who assessed their health negatively and social and demographic factors in the three samples.
| Factor | Sample of 2021 | Sample of 2022 | Sample of 2023 | p-Value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | % | N | % | N | % | ||
| Consumption of dietary supplements | 115 | 135 | 150 | ||||
| Yes | 100 | 87.1 | 98 | 72.9 | 117 | 78.3 | |
| No | 15 | 12.9 | 37 | 27.1 | 32 | 21.7 | |
| Sex | 115 | 137 | 151 | ||||
| Male | 60 | 52.2 | 74 | 54.0 | 59 b | 39.1 b | 0.322 |
| Female * | 55 | 47.8 | 63 | 46.0 | 92 a^ | 60.9 a^ | 0.003 |
| Age | 115 | 137 | 151 | ||||
| 41 years old or younger | 40 b | 34.8 b | 52 b | 38.0 b | 56 b | 37.1 b | 0.167 |
| 42 years old or older | 75 a | 65.2 a | 85 a | 62.0 a | 95 a | 62.9 a | 0.305 |
| Education | 109 | 130 | 144 | ||||
| Non-university education | 47 a | 43.1 a | 48 | 36.9 | 59 a | 41.0 a | 0.268 |
| University education | 62 b | 56.9 b | 82 | 63.1 | 85 b | 59.0 b | 0.125 |
| Place of residence | 115 | 136 | 151 | ||||
| City | 53 | 46.1 | 53 | 39.0 | 53 | 35.1 | 0.991 |
| A small town or village * | 62 | 53.9 | 83 | 61.0 | 98 | 64.9 | 0.011 |
| Marital status | 115 | 137 | 151 | ||||
| Single | 48 | 41.7 | 60 | 43.8 | 58 a | 38.4 a | 0.063 |
| Married | 67 | 58.3 | 77 | 56.2 | 93 b | 61.6 b | 0.379 |
| Number of family members | 115 | 136 | 151 | ||||
| Two or more | 98 | 85.2 | 116 | 85.3 | 126 | 83.4 | 0.073 |
| One | 17 | 14.8 | 20 | 14.7 | 25 | 16.6 | 0.658 |
| With children under 18 years old | 115 | 136 | 151 | ||||
| No | 82 a | 71.3 a | 93 | 68.4 | 110 a | 72.8 a | 0.089 |
| Yes | 33 b | 28.7 b | 43 | 31.6 | 41 b | 27.2 b | 0.475 |
| Employment | 110 | 132 | 138 | ||||
| Employed | 72 b | 65.5 b | 95 ^ | 72.0 ^ | 95 b | 68.8 b | 0.056 |
| Unemployed | 38 a | 34.5 a | 37 | 28.0 | 43 a | 31.2 a | 0.805 |
| Income | 85 | 114 | 129 | ||||
| Lower * | 37 a | 43.5 a | 57 a^ | 50 a^ | 58 a | 45.0 a | 0.043 |
| Higher | 48 b | 56.5 b | 57 b | 50.0 b | 71 b | 55.0 b | 0.125 |
| Food selection criteria | 113 | 131 | 150 | ||||
| Health strengthening | 25 b | 22.1 b | 13 b | 9.9 b | 28 | 18.7 | 0.212 |
| Other | 88 a | 77.9 a | 118 a | 90.1 a | 122 | 81.3 | 0.195 |
| COVID-19 among family members | 115 | 136 | 151 | ||||
| There were no COVID-19 cases in the respondent’s family | 67 | 58.3 | 33 | 24.3 | 92 | 60.9 | 0.193 |
| The respondent or his/her family members suffered from COVID-19 | 48 | 41.7 | 103 | 75.7 | 59 | 39.1 | 0.228 |
| Severeness of COVID-19 | 71 | 21 | 41 | ||||
| Suffered from the asymptomatic or mild form of COVID-19 * | 60 | 84.5 | 13 @ | 61.9 @ | 25 b^ | 61.0 b^ | <0.001 |
| Suffered from a severe form of COVID-19 | 11 | 15.5 | 8 | 38.1 | 16 a | 39.0 a | 0.308 |
* a significant difference (p < 0.05) between all the three samples (2021, 2022 and 2023); ^ a significantly higher prevalence (p < 0.05) compared to the sample collected one year before (2021 vs. 2022, 2022 vs. 2023); @ a significantly lower prevalence (p < 0.05) compared to the sample collected one year before (2021 vs. 2022, 2022 vs. 2023); a—a significantly higher prevalence within the sample (p < 0.05); b—a significantly lower prevalence within the sample (p < 0.05).
Table 6.
Distribution of the respondents who indicated the consumption of dietary supplements and negatively assessed their health by social and demographic factors in the three samples.
Table 6.
Distribution of the respondents who indicated the consumption of dietary supplements and negatively assessed their health by social and demographic factors in the three samples.
| Factor | Sample of 2021 | Sample of 2022 | Sample of 2023 | p-Value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | % | N | % | N | % | ||
| Sex | 100 | 98 | 117 | ||||
| Male * | 52 | 52.0 | 50 @ | 51.0 @ | 42 b | 35.9 b | 0.032 |
| Female | 48 | 48.0 | 48 | 49.0 | 75 a | 64.1 a | 0.303 |
| Age | 100 | 98 | 117 | ||||
| 41 years old or younger | 33 b | 33.0 b | 35 b | 35.7 b | 40 b | 34.2 b | 0.252 |
| 42 years old or older * | 67 a | 67.0 a | 63 a@ | 64.3 a@ | 77 a | 65.8 a | 0.049 |
| Education | 95 | 93 | 110 | ||||
| Non-university education * | 40 a | 42.1 a | 27 @ | 29.0 @ | 43 a | 39.1 a | 0.007 |
| University education | 55 b | 57.9 b | 66 | 71.0 | 67 b | 60.9 b | 0.271 |
| Place of residence | 100 | 98 | 117 | ||||
| City | 47 | 46.5 | 39 @ | 39.8 @ | 44 | 37.6 | 0.127 |
| A small town or village | 53 | 53.5 | 59 @ | 60.2 @ | 73 | 62.4 | 0.065 |
| Marital status | 100 | 98 | 117 | ||||
| Single | 41 | 40.6 | 41 @ | 41.8 @ | 43 | 36.8 | 0.119 |
| Married | 59 | 59.4 | 57 @ | 58.2 @ | 74 | 63.2 | 0.060 |
| Number of family members | 100 | 98 | 117 | ||||
| Two or more * | 84 | 84.0 | 81 @ | 82.7 @ | 96 | 82.2 | 0.023 |
| One | 16 | 16.0 | 17 | 17.3 | 21 | 17.8 | 0.595 |
| With children under 18 years old | 100 | 98 | 117 | ||||
| No * | 73 a | 73.0 a | 68 @ | 69.4 @ | 87 a | 74.4 a | 0.030 |
| Yes | 27 b | 27.0 b | 30 | 30.6 | 30 b | 25.6 b | 0.480 |
| Employment | 96 | 94 | 106 | ||||
| Employed * | 65 b | 67.7 b | 70 @ | 74.5 @ | 73 b | 68.9 b | 0.024 |
| Unemployed | 31 a | 32.3 a | 24 | 25.5 | 33 a | 31.1 a | 0.231 |
| Income | 73 | 79 | 100 | ||||
| Lower | 31 a | 42.5 a | 38 a | 48.1 a | 41 a | 41.0 a | 0.181 |
| Higher | 42 b | 57.5 b | 41 b | 51.9 b | 59 b | 59.0 b | 0.105 |
| Food selection criteria | 98 | 97 | 117 | ||||
| Health strengthening * | 22 b | 22.4 b | 10 b | 10.3 b | 28 ^ | 23.9 ^ | 0.047 |
| Other * | 76 a | 77.6 a | 87 a@ | 89.7 a@ | 89 | 76.1 | 0.046 |
| COVID-19 among family members | 100 | 98 | 117 | ||||
| There were no COVID-19 cases in the respondent’s family | 55 | 55.0 | 18 | 18.4 | 71 | 60.7 | 0.224 |
| The respondent or his/her family members suffered from COVID-19 * | 45 | 45.0 | 80 | 81.6 | 46 | 39.3 | 0.665 |
| Severeness of COVID-19 | 22 | 13 | 32 | ||||
| Suffered from the asymptomatic or mild form of COVID-19 * | 6 b | 27.3 b | 10 | 76.9 | 18 b | 56.3 b | 0.047 |
| Suffered from a severe form of COVID-19 * | 16 a | 72.7 a | 3 @ | 23.1 @ | 14 a^ | 43.8 a^ | 0.010 |
* a significant difference (p < 0.05) between all the three samples (2021, 2022 and 2023); ^ a significantly higher prevalence (p < 0.05) compared to the sample collected one year before (2021 vs. 2022, 2022 vs. 2023); @ a significantly lower prevalence (p < 0.05) compared to the sample collected one year before (2021 vs. 2022, 2022 vs. 2023); a—a significantly higher prevalence within the sample (p < 0.05); b—a significantly lower prevalence within the sample (p < 0.05).
Table 7.
Distribution of the respondents who negatively assessed their health by purpose for the consumption of food supplements in the three samples.
Table 7.
Distribution of the respondents who negatively assessed their health by purpose for the consumption of food supplements in the three samples.
| The Purpose for the Consumption of Dietary Supplements | Sample of 2021 | Sample of 2022 | Sample of 2023 | p-Value * | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | Relative Frequency, % | N | Relative Frequency, % | N | Relative Frequency, % | ||
| Strengthening the immune system | 47 | 47.0 | 46 | 46.9 | 54 | 46.2 | 0.990 |
| The overall strengthening of the body | 37 | 37.0 | 32 | 32.7 | 36 b | 30.8 b | 0.615 |
| Energy boosting | 15 | 14.9 | 17 | 17.3 | 20 | 17.1 | 0.869 |
| Eye care | 11 | 11.0 | 14 | 14.3 | 16 | 13.6 | 0.767 |
| Boosting memory | 10 | 9.9 | 15 | 15.3 | 17 | 14.5 | 0.470 |
| Boosting the nervous system | 32 a | 31.7 a | 33 a | 33.3 a | 31 | 26.3 | 0.489 |
| Strengthening the cardiovascular system * | 44 a | 44.0 a | 26 @ | 26.5 @ | 38 | 32.5 | 0.031 |
| Strengthening the joints, bones | 31 | 31.0 | 28 | 28.6 | 28 | 23.9 | 0.494 |
| Better digestion | 26 a | 26.0 a | 27 a | 27.6 a | 28 a | 23.9 a | 0.830 |
| Regulation of sleep | 18 a | 18.0 a | 18 a | 18.4 a | 21 | 17.9 | 0.996 |
| For athletics | 3 | 3.0 | 3 | 3.1 | 2 | 1.7 | 0.775 |
| Reduction/control of body weight | 3 | 3.0 | 8 | 8.1 | 8 | 6.8 | 0.287 |
| Protection against the COVID-19 infection | 6 | 6.0 | 4 | 4.1 | 2 | 1.7 | 0.254 |
| Total | 100 | 98 | 117 | ||||
* a significant difference (p < 0.05) between all the three samples (2021, 2022 and 2023); @ a significantly lower prevalence (p < 0.05) compared to the sample collected one year before (2021 vs. 2022, 2022 vs. 2023); a—a significantly higher prevalence within the sample (p < 0.05); b—a significantly lower prevalence within the sample (p < 0.05).
Table 8.
Distribution of the respondents by the consumption of exact dietary supplements in the samples of 2022 and 2023, with respect to a subjective health assessment.
Table 8.
Distribution of the respondents by the consumption of exact dietary supplements in the samples of 2022 and 2023, with respect to a subjective health assessment.
| Dietary Supplements | Whole Sample of 2022 | Whole Sample of 2023 (N = 1174) | p-Value * | Among Those Who Assessed Their Health Negatively in 2022 | Among Those Who Assessed Their Health Negatively in 2023 | p-Value * | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | Relative Frequency (%) | N | Relative Frequency (%) | N | Relative Frequency (%) | N | Relative Frequency (%) | |||
| Complex of vitamins and minerals | 396 | 35.2 | 430 | 37.0 | 0.377 | 32 | 32.3 | 43 | 36.8 | 0.496 |
| Complex of vitamins | 89 | 7.9 | 75 | 6.4 | 0.175 | 10 | 10.2 | 10 | 8.5 | 0.695 |
| Complex of minerals | 31 | 2.8 | 37 | 3.2 | 0.549 | 5 | 5.1 | 2 | 1.7 | 0.167 |
| Omega-3 fatty acids | 332 | 29.5 | 360 | 31.0 | 0.452 | 31 | 31.6 | 35 | 29.9 | 0.824 |
| Fish oil | 282 | 25.1 | 304 | 26.1 | 0.557 | 24 | 24.2 | 24 | 20.5 | 0.511 |
| Plant-based | 91 | 8.1 | 96 | 8.3 | 0.885 | 7 | 7.1 | 9 | 7.7 | 0.862 |
| Targeted at the immune system | 154 | 13.7 | 139 | 12.0 | 0.214 | 11 | 11.1 | 10 | 8.5 | 0.526 |
| Targeted at the cardiovascular system | 115 | 10.2 | 126 | 10.8 | 0.634 | 15 | 15.3 | 17 | 14.5 | 0.898 |
| Targeted at the nervous system | 110 | 9.8 | 94 | 8.1 | 0.155 | 14 | 14.3 | 12 | 10.3 | 0.382 |
| Targeted at the general strengthening of the body | 109 | 9.7 | 118 | 10.1 | 0.715 | 9 | 9.2 | 12 | 10.2 | 0.773 |
| Vitamin C | 354 | 31.5 | 340 | 29.3 | 0.246 | 28 | 28.3 | 26 | 22.2 | 0.305 |
| Vitamin D | 539 | 47.9 | 534 | 45.9 | 0.339 | 54 | 54.5 | 60 | 51.3 | 0.632 |
| Vitamin A | 67 | 6.0 | 76 | 6.5 | 0.567 | 5 | 5.1 | 9 | 7.7 | 0.432 |
| B Group vitamins | 288 | 25.6 | 307 | 26.4 | 0.664 | 34 a | 34.7 a | 32 | 27.4 | 0.266 |
| Folic acid | 70 | 6.2 | 80 | 6.9 | 0.526 | 5 | 5.1 | 9 | 7.6 | 0.432 |
| Other vitamins | 25 | 2.2 | 36 | 3.1 | 0.195 | 5 a | 5.1 a | 1 | 0.9 | 0.062 |
| Iron | 151 | 13.4 | 167 | 14.4 | 0.517 | 12 | 12.2 | 13 | 11.1 | 0.817 |
| Magnesium | 380 | 33.8 | 436 | 37.5 | 0.064 | 45 a | 45.9 a | 49 | 41.5 | 0.598 |
| Potassium | 161 | 14.3 | 188 | 16.2 | 0.218 | 21 a | 21.4 a | 24 | 20.5 | 0.900 |
| Calcium | 127 | 11.3 | 129 | 11.1 | 0.881 | 12 | 12.2 | 10 | 8.5 | 0.387 |
| Zinc | 181 | 16.1 | 163 | 14.0 | 0.165 | 13 | 13.3 | 14 | 12 | 0.796 |
| Selenium | 104 | 9.3 | 101 | 8.7 | 0.639 | 3 b | 3.1 b | 9 | 7.7 | 0.136 |
| Other minerals | 19 | 1.7 | 26 | 2.2 | 0.346 | 2 | 2.0 | 4 | 3.4 | 0.533 |
| Coenzyme Q10 | 58 | 5.2 | 55 | 4.7 | 0.638 | 1 | 1.0 | 7 | 6.0 | 0.054 |
| Probiotics | 106 | 9.4 | 120 | 10.3 | 0.473 | 13 | 13.3 | 17 | 14.5 | 0.767 |
| Other | 38 | 3.4 | 48 | 4.1 | 0.346 | 2 | 2.0 | 4 | 3.4 | 0.533 |
| Did not know/Could not answer | 10 | 0.9 | 11 | 0.9 | 0.886 | 1 | 1.0 | 1 | 0.9 | 0.905 |
| Total | 1124 | 1163 | 98 | 117 | ||||||
*—p-values were calculated comparing the frequencies between the samples collected in 2022 and 2023; a—a significantly higher prevalence within the sample (p < 0.05); b—a significantly lower prevalence within the sample (p < 0.05).
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
MDPI and ACS Style
Arlauskas, R.; Austys, D.; Dobrovolskij, V.; Stukas, R. Consumption of Dietary Supplements among Working-Age Residents of Lithuania in the Period from 2021 to 2023. Medicina 2024, 60, 669. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina60040669
AMA Style
Arlauskas R, Austys D, Dobrovolskij V, Stukas R. Consumption of Dietary Supplements among Working-Age Residents of Lithuania in the Period from 2021 to 2023. Medicina. 2024; 60(4):669. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina60040669
Chicago/Turabian StyleArlauskas, Rokas, Donatas Austys, Valerij Dobrovolskij, and Rimantas Stukas. 2024. "Consumption of Dietary Supplements among Working-Age Residents of Lithuania in the Period from 2021 to 2023" Medicina 60, no. 4: 669. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina60040669
