Impact of food texture modifications on oral processing behaviour, bolus properties and postprandial glucose responses

Abstract

Several studies have demonstrated food texture manipulation on oral processing behaviour (OPB). We explored the effect of texture-differences of equivalent carbohydrate load on OPB, bolus properties and postprandial glycaemic responses (PPG). In a randomised cross-over, within-subjects, non-blinded design, healthy male participants (N = 39) consumed fixed portions of white rice (WR) and rice cake (RC) while being video recorded to measure microstructural eating behaviours. PPG was compared between test foods over a period of 120-min, and the bolus properties and saliva uptake at swallow were measured for both test foods. RC displayed higher instrumental hardness, chewiness and Young's modulus than WR ( p = 0.01), and participants perceived RC as more springy and sticky than WR ( p < 0.001). The RC meal was chewed more per bite ( p < 0.001) and consumed at a faster eating rate ( p = 0.033) than WR. WR bolus particles were smaller at swallow ( p < 0.001) with a larger total surface area ( p < 0.001), compared to RC. The glucose response for RC was significantly higher during the first 30-min postprandial period (p = 0.010), and lower in the later (30–120 min) postprandial period ( p = 0.031) compared to WR. Total blood glucose iAUC did not differ significantly between WR and RC meals despite their large differences in texture, OPB and bolus properties. Oro-sensory exposure time was a significant predictor of glucose iAUC 30min for both test meals (RC, p = 0.003; WR, p = 0.029). Saliva uptake in the bolus was significantly positively associated with blood glucose during the first 30-min postprandial period for the RC meal ( p = 0.008), but not for WR. We conclude that food texture modifications can influence OPB and bolus properties which are key contributors to the dynamic evolution of the glycaemic response. Total blood glucose responses were the same for both test foods, though differences in oral processing and bolus properties influenced temporal changes in PPG.

Independent and combined impact of texture manipulation on oral processing behaviours among faster and slower eaters

“…Recent findings demonstrate that food texture modifications for an equivalent carbohydrate load stimulate differences in oral processing, which result in differences in bolus surface area and saliva uptake which were associated with changes in temporal glucose release. 48 Differences observed between faster and slower eaters can also be reflected in bolus properties at swallow, and the resultant glucose and insulin responses, suggesting that texture modifications will interact with eating style in how they influence metabolic responses. 36,49 Further research is needed extend the findings of the current study to differences in food bolus properties across different textures to better understand the impact on metabolic responses.…”

Combination of Texture-Induced Oral Processing and Vegetable Preload Strategy Reduced Glycemic Excursion but Decreased Insulin Sensitivity

“…The texture difference might not be as great as to induce significant physiological effect when co-ingested with rice. It is suggested that the texture variation of non-carbohydrate foods may not make a significant difference on postprandial GR and IR as the texture variation of carbohydrate foods did [ 52 , 53 , 54 ]. Furthermore, the effect of the mastication might be overshadowed by individual variation in the capacity of oral processing and the favorite hardness of cooked broccoli.…”

Influence of Sensory Properties in Moderating Eating Behaviors and Food Intake

“…Food can influence eating rate but also oral processing and saliva-bolus uptake during the oral phase of digestion. Differences in food oral processing behavior have been shown to contribute to temporal changes in post-prandial glucose and insulin, and post-meal satiety responses (65)(66)(67). Slower eating rates result in greater bolus surface area, saliva uptakes and may have an incretin effect as early glucose release stimulates greater early insulin release (36,65).…”