Individual Beliefs and Experiences With Brain Health Dietary Supplements in the United States

Prachi Prajapati; Erin Holmes; Yi Yang

doi:10.1016/j.jand.2024.03.010

Individual Beliefs and Experiences With Brain Health Dietary Supplements in the United States

J Acad Nutr Diet. 2024 Mar 26:S2212-2672(24)00143-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jand.2024.03.010. Online ahead of print.

Authors

Prachi Prajapati¹, Erin Holmes², Yi Yang³

Affiliations

¹ Department of Pharmacy Administration, University of Mississippi, University, Mississippi.
² Department of Pharmacy Administration, University of Mississippi, University, Mississippi; Research Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Mississippi, University, Mississippi.
³ Department of Pharmacy Administration, University of Mississippi, University, Mississippi; Research Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Mississippi, University, Mississippi. Electronic address: yiyang@olemiss.edu.

PMID: 38527569
DOI: 10.1016/j.jand.2024.03.010

Abstract

Background: Although the use of brain health dietary supplements (brain DS) has increased, there is limited research on safety and risk of these products. Brain DS may be beneficial for improving memory, concentration, and focus but may also carry risks.

Objectives: To assess brain DS users' utilization experiences and identify factors associated with likelihood of brain DS use among nonusers.

Design: An internet-based cross-sectional survey study was conducted using a sample of middle-aged US adults. Respondents' sociodemographic characteristics and health beliefs regarding brain DS were collected. Brain DS users' utilization experiences such as negative side effects and spending were also collected.

Participants and setting: Purposive sampling was utilized for users and nonusers sample recruitment.

Main outcome measures: Brain DS users' utilization experience and future likelihood of brain DS use among nonusers.

Statistical analyses performed: Descriptive statistics on brain DS users' utilization experiences were reported. Ordinal logistic regression with sociodemographic and belief characteristics as predictors was employed to identify factors associated with the likelihood of brain DS among nonusers.

Results: Five hundred twenty-five respondents (mean age = 43.8 ± 9.2 years) completed the survey. Among 260 users, primary reasons for use were enhancing memory (n = 136) and helping concentration and focus (n = 108). During the past year, 40% spent $50 to $200 (range = $0 to >$1,000) and 37% reported experiencing negative side effects. Among 265 nonusers, being female (odds ratio 2.04, 95% CI 1.21 to 3.45), perceived susceptibility to brain problems (odds ratio 1.90, 95% CI 1.28 to 2.83), recommendation from others (odds ratio 1.55, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.35) and perceived benefits of brain DS (odds ratio 2.82, 95% CI 1.60 to 4.96) were significantly associated with increased likelihood of future brain DS use.

Conclusions: Individual spending on brain DS varies and about 40% of users reported experiencing negative side effects. As individuals primarily rely on healthcare providers for recommendations, health care providers should be prepared to engage in discussions about brain DS with patients.

Keywords: Health belief model; Likelihood of use; Side effects; Spending; Survey.