Statistical analysis
The associations of eating behaviour with symptoms of pelvic floor
disorders were analyzed using simple (Model 1) and multiple logistic
regression models (Model 2). Model 2 was adjusted with age, BMI,
education, physical workload, previous physical activity (age 17–29),
current physical activity (MET-h/d), menopausal status, parity, and
hysterectomy. Correlation analysis, residual plots and scatter plots
between each continuous predictor and the logits values were used for
testing the model assumptions. Statistical analyses were performed using
R and IBM SPSS Statistics 22.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL). The level of
significance was set at p≤0.05.
RESULTS
Participants’ demographical,
gynaecological, and physical activity status in total sample and in
different pelvic floor disorder subsamples have been reported
previously11. The frequencies of various eating styles
among women with different symptoms of pelvic floor disorders are
presented in Table S1.
In comparison to women reporting normal eating, women with overeating
(OR 1.49, CI 1.14–1.96, p=0.004) and restrictive eating (OR 1.63, CI
1.09–2.44, p=0.017) behaviour were more likely to experience symptoms
of stress urinary incontinence (Table 1: Model 1), but these
associations attenuated after controlling for confounding factors (Table
1: Model 2). Restrictive eating
was also associated with constipation and defecation difficulties in
Model 1 (OR 1.90, CI 1.18–3.07,
p=0.008) and Model 2 (OR 1.73, CI 1.03–2.90, p=0.039).
No snacking between meals (OR 0.69, CI 0.50–0.95, p=0.022) and grazing
throughout the evening (OR 1.59, CI 1.09–2.31, p=0.016) were associated
with symptoms of stress urinary incontinence in Model 1 (Table 2). In
addition, no snacking between meals (OR 0.43, CI 0.20–0.90, p=0.025)
was associated with symptoms of faecal incontinence in Model 1. Women
who had reported to have highest food consumption in the evening were
more likely to experience symptoms of urge urinary incontinence
according to both Model 1 (OR 1.84, CI 1.23–2.76, p=0.003) and Model 2
(OR 2.01, CI 1.32–3.07, p=0.001).
Attempting to maintain healthy eating patterns was associated with
symptoms of stress urinary incontinence (OR 0.60, CI 0.36–0.99,
p=0.047) and urge urinary incontinence (OR 0.48, CI 0.26–0.88, p=0.018)
in Model 1 (Table 3). The association remained statistically significant
for symptoms of urge urinary incontinence (OR 0.45, CI 0.24–0.85,
p=0.014) when adding confounding factors in Model 2.