Objectives
The study conducted was Sabalpur village (5000 population) in January 2016 and entailed- (i) participatory food seasonality/mapping five focus group discussions with men, pregnant and lactating women (N: 46); (ii) market survey (N:5), (iii) active screening camp (N: 99 adult women, of which 23 were pregnant) to identify âat nutritional risk women’ (height <145 cms and/or MUAC <23 cms); (iv) home visits to nutritional risk women (N:20) for administering women's dietary diversity questionnaire and counseling and (v) repeat visit after one week to assess any behaviour adoption.
Methods
The study conducted was Sabalpur village (5000 population) in January 2016 and entailed- (i) participatory food seasonality/mapping five focus group discussions with men, pregnant and lactating women (N: 46); (ii) market survey (N:5), (iii) active screening camp (N: 99 adult women, of which 23 were pregnant) to identify âat nutritional risk women’ (height <145 cms and/or MUAC <23 cms); (iv) home visits to nutritional risk women (N:20) for administering women's dietary diversity questionnaire and counseling and (v) repeat visit after one week to assess any behaviour adoption.
Results
Household decision makers on âWhat to cook and Eat’ were mother-in-law and/or husband. Special diet for pregnancy was in evident. Religion, caste and poverty dictated food beliefs (25 food taboos identified). Food tolerance (Rat, snack, birds and pig) was in lowest caste. From the 12 food groups assessed, rice/Rice flakes/puffed rice and wet potato /cauliflower curry formed staple diet. Twenty-two micronutrient rich foods were grown, sold but not eaten. Mean (SD) calorie intake was 915 (25) Kcal/day, with minimal change in one week. Ten recipes were developed for use in the fortnightly sessions.
Conclusions
ProPAN helps assessing dietary gaps and cultural food norms. Participatory discussions with men and women and screening camps can simplify and shorten ProPAN. However, it cannot be operationalized without a trained nutritionist.
