A Randomized Controlled Trial of a Culinary Medicine Intervention in a Virtual Teaching Kitchen for Primary Care Residents.

IF 4.2 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Nathan Isaac Wood, Maya Fussell, Erica Benghiat, Lora Silver, Max Goldstein, Amy Ralph, Lisa Mastroianni, Erica Spatz, Dana Small, Rosemarie Fisher, Donna Windish
{"title":"A Randomized Controlled Trial of a Culinary Medicine Intervention in a Virtual Teaching Kitchen for Primary Care Residents.","authors":"Nathan Isaac Wood, Maya Fussell, Erica Benghiat, Lora Silver, Max Goldstein, Amy Ralph, Lisa Mastroianni, Erica Spatz, Dana Small, Rosemarie Fisher, Donna Windish","doi":"10.1007/s11606-025-09652-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>For decades, physicians have received inadequate nutrition education. \"Culinary medicine,\" an emerging pedagogy in medical education, seeks to address this by integrating hands-on cooking to enhance nutrition training. While cohort and cross-sectional studies have demonstrated culinary medicine's efficacy, no randomized controlled trials to date have been conducted among medical trainees.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the efficacy of a hands-on culinary medicine curriculum compared to didactics-only nutrition education.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Two versions of a nutrition education curriculum were developed: a culinary medicine curriculum (intervention) and a didactics-only curriculum (control). The curricula were assessed using a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial design.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>All active Yale Primary Care residents were randomized to receive either the intervention curriculum or the control curriculum.</p><p><strong>Main measures: </strong>Residents completed surveys at baseline, immediately post-session, and 8 weeks post-session assessing nutrition knowledge, attitudes regarding providing dietary counseling, and behavior in providing nutrition resources to patients.</p><p><strong>Key results: </strong>Nutrition knowledge increased from baseline to immediately post-session in both groups (control (mean percent correct 54% to 94%, P = 0.001), intervention (60% to 92%, P = 0.001)). Compared to the control group, the intervention group gained more confidence in counseling patients on a plant-forward diet (F = 5.44, P = 0.03). Residents in the intervention group reported providing nutrition resources to their patients significantly more frequently at 8 weeks post-session than at baseline (mean frequency per week 0.1 to 0.9, P = 0.002), a change that was not demonstrated among control group participants (0.1 to 0.5, P = 0.35).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both culinary medicine and didactics-only pedagogies can be effective approaches to teaching nutrition. Culinary medicine was found in this trial to be non-inferior to a didactics-only approach and may be superior in improving participants' confidence in providing dietary counseling to patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":15860,"journal":{"name":"Journal of General Internal Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of General Internal Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-025-09652-x","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: For decades, physicians have received inadequate nutrition education. "Culinary medicine," an emerging pedagogy in medical education, seeks to address this by integrating hands-on cooking to enhance nutrition training. While cohort and cross-sectional studies have demonstrated culinary medicine's efficacy, no randomized controlled trials to date have been conducted among medical trainees.

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of a hands-on culinary medicine curriculum compared to didactics-only nutrition education.

Design: Two versions of a nutrition education curriculum were developed: a culinary medicine curriculum (intervention) and a didactics-only curriculum (control). The curricula were assessed using a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial design.

Participants: All active Yale Primary Care residents were randomized to receive either the intervention curriculum or the control curriculum.

Main measures: Residents completed surveys at baseline, immediately post-session, and 8 weeks post-session assessing nutrition knowledge, attitudes regarding providing dietary counseling, and behavior in providing nutrition resources to patients.

Key results: Nutrition knowledge increased from baseline to immediately post-session in both groups (control (mean percent correct 54% to 94%, P = 0.001), intervention (60% to 92%, P = 0.001)). Compared to the control group, the intervention group gained more confidence in counseling patients on a plant-forward diet (F = 5.44, P = 0.03). Residents in the intervention group reported providing nutrition resources to their patients significantly more frequently at 8 weeks post-session than at baseline (mean frequency per week 0.1 to 0.9, P = 0.002), a change that was not demonstrated among control group participants (0.1 to 0.5, P = 0.35).

Conclusions: Both culinary medicine and didactics-only pedagogies can be effective approaches to teaching nutrition. Culinary medicine was found in this trial to be non-inferior to a didactics-only approach and may be superior in improving participants' confidence in providing dietary counseling to patients.

初级保健住院医师虚拟教学厨房烹饪医学干预的随机对照试验。
背景:几十年来,医生接受的营养教育不足。“烹饪医学”是医学教育中的一种新兴教学法,旨在通过结合动手烹饪来加强营养培训来解决这一问题。虽然队列和横断面研究已经证明了烹饪药物的功效,但迄今为止还没有在医学实习生中进行过随机对照试验。目的:评价实践烹饪医学课程与纯教学式营养教育的效果。设计:制定了两个版本的营养教育课程:烹饪医学课程(干预)和教学课程(对照)。课程采用非劣效性随机对照试验设计进行评估。参与者:所有活跃的耶鲁初级保健住院医师随机接受干预课程或对照课程。主要措施:住院医师在基线、治疗后立即和治疗后8周完成调查,评估营养知识、提供饮食咨询的态度和向患者提供营养资源的行为。关键结果:两组的营养知识从基线到治疗后立即增加(对照组(平均正确率54%至94%,P = 0.001),干预组(60%至92%,P = 0.001))。与对照组相比,干预组在向患者咨询植物性饮食方面更有信心(F = 5.44, P = 0.03)。干预组的住院医生报告说,在治疗后8周向患者提供营养资源的频率明显高于基线(每周平均频率0.1至0.9,P = 0.002),而对照组参与者没有表现出这种变化(0.1至0.5,P = 0.35)。结论:烹饪医学和唯教学教学法都是有效的营养学教学方法。在本试验中发现,烹饪医学并不逊于单纯的教学方法,而且可能在提高参与者对患者提供饮食咨询的信心方面更胜一筹。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of General Internal Medicine
Journal of General Internal Medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
5.30%
发文量
749
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of General Internal Medicine is the official journal of the Society of General Internal Medicine. It promotes improved patient care, research, and education in primary care, general internal medicine, and hospital medicine. Its articles focus on topics such as clinical medicine, epidemiology, prevention, health care delivery, curriculum development, and numerous other non-traditional themes, in addition to classic clinical research on problems in internal medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信