Skip to main content

Table 4 Fluids intake of participants

From: The comparison of water intake patterns and hydration biomarkers among young adults with different hydration statuses in Hebei, China

 

OH (n = 58)

MH (n = 72)

HH (n = 26)

Male (n = 19)

Female (n = 39)

Total (n = 58)

Male (n = 44)

Female (n = 28)

Total (n = 72)

Male (n = 17)

Female (n = 9)

Total (n = 26)

M (Q)

%

M (Q)

%

M (Q)

%

M (Q)

%

M (Q)

%

M (Q)

%

M (Q)

%

M (Q)

%

M (Q)

%

Total water intake (TFI)

2893 (1052)

2443 (625)

2504 (1288)*

2554 (674)

1855 (408)†

2192 (791)†

2133 (654)

1418 (373)

1839 (914) ‡

Percentage meeting adequate TFI of China (%)

8 (42.1%)

12 (30.8%)

20 (34.5%)*

7 (15.9%)

2 (7.1%)

9 (12.5%)

2 (11.8%)

0 (0.0%)

2 (7.7%)‡

Percentage meeting adequate TFI of EFSA (%)

12 (63.2%)*

32 (82.1%)*

44 (75.9%)*

24 (54.5%)*

7 (25.0%)†

31 (43.1%)

3 (17.6%)

0 (0.0%)‡

3 (11.5%)‡

Percentage meeting adequate TFI of WHO (%)

9 (47.4%)

26 (66.7%)*

35 (60.3%)*

8 (18.2%)

4 (14.3%)

12 (16.7%)

2 (11.8%)

0 (0.0%)‡

2 (7.7%)‡

Total drinking fluids (mL)

1548 (909)

54.4%

1271 (774)

53.9%

1362 (799) *

54.1%*

1220 (484)

48.6%

785 (342)

45.4%

1060 (588) †

47.4%†

967 (273)

45.3%

521 (226)

37.6%

913 (522)‡

42.6%‡

Percentage meeting adequate total drinking fluids of China (%)

9 (47.4%)*

12 (30.8%)

21 (36.2%)*

6 (13.6%)

2 (7.1%)

8 (11.1%)†

0 (0.0%)†

0 (0.0%)

0 (0.0%)‡

 Water

1532 (1016)

85.3%

1053 (707)

84.2%

1194 (867) *

84.6% *

971 (463)

81.6%

698 (216)†

77.8%†

812 (475)

80.2%

597 (498)

68.2%

226 (204)

54.6%

418 (461)‡

63.5%‡

 Tea

0 (0)

0.0%

0 (0)

0.7%

0 (0)

0.5%

0 (0)

0.3%

0 (0)

4.5%

0 (0)

1.9%

0 (0)

0.6%

0 (0)

0.0%

0 (0)

0.4%

 Milk and milk products

29 (114)

4.5%

79 (141)

7.6%

67 (141)

6.6%

20 (141)

5.1%

65 (151)

9.4%

40 (141)

6.8%

0 (110)

7.1%

43 (88)

11.7%

7 (97)

8.7%

 SSBs

50 (83)

8.5%

9 (76)

3.9%

33 (80) *

5.4%*

47 (217)

10.2%

0 (55)

4.8%

38 (123)

8.1%

86 (352)

19.1%

112 (201)

25.7%

99 (301)‡

21.4%‡

 Alcohol

0 (0)

0.0%

0 (0)

0.0%

0 (0) *

0.0%*

0 (0)

1.1%

0 (0)

0.0%

0 (0)

0.7%

0 (18)

2.7%

0 (0)

0.0%

0 (0)‡

1.8%‡

 Others

0 (36)

1.6%

4 (40)

3.4%

0 (38)

2.8%

2 (32)

1.6%

11 (36)

3.6%

9 (32)

2.4%

0 (23)

2.3%

36 (60)

8.0%

2 (50)

4.3%

Water from food (mL)

1312 (323)

45.6%

1088 (336)

46.1%

1183 (414)

45.9%*

1299 (323)

51.4%

1001 (259)

54.6%

1184 (358)

52.6%

1241 (467)

54.7%

798 (149)

62.4%

999 (549)

57.4%‡

 Staple food

385 (120)

30.0%

252 (104)

22.1%

280 (160)

24.7%

369 (120)

29.2%

265 (159)

24.3%

331 (129)

27.3%

329 (127)

28.6%

210 (82)

25.3%

268 (143)

27.5%

 Dishes

697 (217)

53.0%

559 (211)

50.1%

620 (227)

51.0%

688 (216)

53.1%

548 (219)

54.7%

632 (190)

53.7%

624 (237)

51.1%

383 (253)

51.7%

592 (313)

51.3%

 Soup

62 (183)

5.9%

69 (183)

16.8%

69 (183)

7.7%

170 (227)

10.9%

88 (163)

9.8%

105 (201)

10.4%

113 (246)

11.9%

46 (105)

15.6%

108 (264)

13.2%

 Porridge

95 (157)

9.9%

175 (218)

8.7%

149 (222)*

14.5%*

78 (140)

6.8%

98 (176)†

10.4%

87 (144)

8.2%†

43 (195)

8.2%

104 (271)

7.4%

45 (167)‡

7.9%‡

 Snacks

0 (5)

1.3%

0 (40)

2.4%

0 (32)*

2.0%*

0 (0)

0.1%

0 (0)

0.9%

0 (0)

0.4%†

0 (0)

0.2%

0 (0)

0.0%

0 (0)‡

0.2%‡

  1. Values are shown as the median (M) and quartile ranges (Q)
  2. According to the references of TWI in EFSA, WHO and China, there were significantly more subjects in OH group had enough TWI than that in MH and HH groups (χ2 = 32.291, P < 0.001; χ2 = 36.592, P < 0.001; χ2 = 12.656, P = 0.002). In males, there were significantly more subjects in OH group had enough TWI than that in MH and HH groups (χ2 = 7.072, P = 0.025; χ2 = 8.753, P = 0.013; χ2 = 5.823, P = 0.058) In females, there were significantly more subjects in OH group had enough TWI than that in MH and HH groups (χ2 = 26.056, P < 0.001; χ2 = 33.687, P < 0.001; χ2 = 7.536, P = 0.020). According to the reference of total drinking fluids in China, there were significantly more subjects in OH group had enough total drinking fluids than that in MH and HH groups, in total, males and females, respectively (χ2 = 20.476, P < 0.001; χ2 = 13.363, P = 0.001; χ2 = 7.536, P = 0.020)
  3. Significantly differences were found in the contributions of total drinking fluids and water from food to TWI among the three groups (F = 18.726, P < 0.001; F = 18.726, P < 0.001). Refer to the percentages of fluids to total drinking fluids, there were significant differences in the percentages in the amounts of water, SSBs and alcohols in total drinking fluids (F = 13.715, P < 0.001; F = 13.912, P < 0.001; F = 3.956, P = 0.021). There were significant differences of the contributions of water from porridge and snacks to water from food (F = 8.349, P < 0.001; F = 5.686, P = 0.004). In males, significantly differences were found in the contributions of total drinking fluids and water from food to TWI among the three groups (F = 6.116, P = 0.003; F = 6.116, P = 0.003). In males, there were different percentages of the intake of water and water from snacks in water from food (F = 4.473, P = 0.015; F = 5.710, P = 0.005). In females, significant differences were found in the percentage of total drinking fluid and water from food in TWI (F = 15.951, P < 0.001; F = 15.951, P < 0.001); according to the contributions of different fluids to total drinking fluids, differences were found in water, SSBs and water from porridge (F = 12.877, P < 0.001; F = 17.594, P < 0.001; F = 5.092, P = 0.009)
  4. Differences were found in the amounts of TWI, total drinking fluids, water, SSBs, alcohols and the water from porridge and snacks among the three groups (χ2 = 23.421, P < 0.001; χ2 = 31.087, P = 0.013; χ2 = 40.126, P < 0.001; χ2 = 8.654, P = 0.013; χ2 = 7.830, P = 0.020; χ2 = 12.639, P = 0.002; χ2 = 14.303, P = 0.001), but no significant differences were found in the intake of water from food (χ2 = 4.010, P = 0.135). There were differences in the amounts of TWI, water from food, and water from staple food, dishes between males and females in OH group (Z = − 2.444, P = 0.015; Z = − 2.841, P = 0.004; Z = − 4.664, P = 0.000; Z = − 3.405, P = 0.001). In males, differences were found in the amounts of TWI, total drinking fluids, water and water from snacks (χ2 = 16.361, P < 0.001; χ2 = 18.832, P < 0.001; χ2 = 11.524 P = 0.003). In females, differences were found in the amounts of TWI, total drinking fluids, water from food, water, SSBs and water from porridge (χ2 = 35.127, P < 0.001; χ2 = 36.403, P < 0.001; χ2 = 13.549, P = 0.001; χ2 = 37.029, P < 0.001; χ2 = 7.466, P = 0.024; χ2 = 9.745, P = 0.008). In the MH group, there were significant differences in the amounts of TWI, total drinking fluids, water from food, water, SSBs, alcohol and water from staple food, dishes and snacks (Z = − 5.117, P < 0.001; Z = − 4.147, P < 0.001; Z = − 4.713, P < 0.001; Z = − 4.292, P < 0.001; Z = − 2.685, P = 0.007; Z = − 2.024, P = 0.043; Z = − 5.002, P < 0.001; Z = − 3.523, P < 0.001; Z = − 1.966, P = 0.049). In the HH group, males had higher amounts of TWI, total drinking fluids, water from food, water, water from staple food and dishes than females (Z = − 3.800, P = 0.000; Z = − 3.476, P = 0.001; Z = − 2.937, P = 0.001; Z = − 3.369, P = 0.000; Z = − 3.422, P = 0.001; Z = − 2.345, P = 0.019)
  5. *There was statistically significant difference between OH and MH groups, P < 0.05
  6. †There was statistically significant difference between MH and HH groups, P < 0.05
  7. ‡There was statistically significant difference between OH and HH groups, P < 0.05. The One-way ANOVA and Kruskal–Wallis H test were used to compare the differences among the three groups, including males and females. When comparing the differences between males and females within the group, Mann–Whitney U test and Student’s t test were used
Back to article page

Nutrition & Metabolism

ISSN: 1743-7075

Contact us