在健康相关社会需求筛查中同时使用饥饿生命体征和简短营养安全筛查器的益处。

IF 3.6 3区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Eric E Calloway, Kathryn E Coakley, Leah R Carpenter, Tony Gargano, Amy L Yaroch
{"title":"在健康相关社会需求筛查中同时使用饥饿生命体征和简短营养安全筛查器的益处。","authors":"Eric E Calloway, Kathryn E Coakley, Leah R Carpenter, Tony Gargano, Amy L Yaroch","doi":"10.1093/tbm/ibae037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Food security is a commonly screened for health-related social need at hospitals and community settings, and until recently, there were no tools to additionally screen for nutrition security. The purpose of this study was to assess the potential advantage of including a one-item brief nutrition security screener (BNSS) alongside the commonly used two-item Hunger Vital Sign (HVS) food security screener for identifying individuals with diet-related health risks. Cross-sectional survey data were collected from April to June 2021. Generalized linear mixed models were used to assess associations between screening status and dietary and health variables. Recruitment was done across five states (California, Florida, Maryland, North Carolina, and Washington) from community-based organizations. Participants (n = 435) were, on average, 44.7 years old (SD = 14.5), predominantly women (77%), and racially/ethnically diverse. In adjusted analyses, being in the food insecure and nutrition insecure group (but not the food insecure and nutrition secure or food secure and nutrition insecure groups) was associated with significantly increased odds for self-reported \"fair\" or \"poor\" general health [OR = 2.914 (95% CI = 1.521-5.581)], reporting at least one chronic condition [2.028 (1.024-4.018)], and \"low\" fruit and vegetable intake [2.421 (1.258-4.660)], compared with the food secure and nutrition secure group. These findings support using both the HVS and BNSS simultaneously in health-related social needs screening to identify participants at the highest risk for poor dietary and health outcomes and warrant further investigation into applying these screeners to clinical and community settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":48679,"journal":{"name":"Translational Behavioral Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"445-451"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Benefits of using both the Hunger Vital Sign and brief nutrition security screener in health-related social needs screening.\",\"authors\":\"Eric E Calloway, Kathryn E Coakley, Leah R Carpenter, Tony Gargano, Amy L Yaroch\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/tbm/ibae037\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Food security is a commonly screened for health-related social need at hospitals and community settings, and until recently, there were no tools to additionally screen for nutrition security. The purpose of this study was to assess the potential advantage of including a one-item brief nutrition security screener (BNSS) alongside the commonly used two-item Hunger Vital Sign (HVS) food security screener for identifying individuals with diet-related health risks. Cross-sectional survey data were collected from April to June 2021. Generalized linear mixed models were used to assess associations between screening status and dietary and health variables. Recruitment was done across five states (California, Florida, Maryland, North Carolina, and Washington) from community-based organizations. Participants (n = 435) were, on average, 44.7 years old (SD = 14.5), predominantly women (77%), and racially/ethnically diverse. In adjusted analyses, being in the food insecure and nutrition insecure group (but not the food insecure and nutrition secure or food secure and nutrition insecure groups) was associated with significantly increased odds for self-reported \\\"fair\\\" or \\\"poor\\\" general health [OR = 2.914 (95% CI = 1.521-5.581)], reporting at least one chronic condition [2.028 (1.024-4.018)], and \\\"low\\\" fruit and vegetable intake [2.421 (1.258-4.660)], compared with the food secure and nutrition secure group. These findings support using both the HVS and BNSS simultaneously in health-related social needs screening to identify participants at the highest risk for poor dietary and health outcomes and warrant further investigation into applying these screeners to clinical and community settings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48679,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Translational Behavioral Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"445-451\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Translational Behavioral Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/ibae037\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Translational Behavioral Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/ibae037","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在医院和社区环境中,食品安全是一种常见的健康相关社会需求筛查方法,但直到最近,还没有任何工具可用于额外的营养安全筛查。本研究的目的是评估在常用的双项目饥饿生命体征(HVS)食物安全筛查工具之外增加单项目简要营养安全筛查工具(BNSS)的潜在优势,以识别存在饮食相关健康风险的个体。横断面调查数据收集于 2021 年 4 月至 6 月。采用广义线性混合模型评估筛查状况与饮食和健康变量之间的关联。在五个州(加利福尼亚州、佛罗里达州、马里兰州、北卡罗来纳州和华盛顿州)的社区组织中进行了招募。参与者(n = 435)的平均年龄为 44.7 岁(SD = 14.5),以女性为主(77%),种族/民族多样化。在调整分析中,食物无保障和营养无保障组(而非食物无保障和营养有保障组或食物有保障和营养无保障组)与自我报告的总体健康状况 "一般 "或 "差 "的几率显著增加有关 [OR = 2.914(95% CI = 1.521-5.581)]、报告至少一种慢性病[2.028(1.024-4.018)]以及水果和蔬菜摄入量 "低"[2.421(1.258-4.660)]的几率。这些研究结果支持在与健康相关的社会需求筛查中同时使用 HVS 和 BNSS 来识别饮食和健康状况不良风险最高的参与者,并值得进一步研究如何将这些筛查工具应用到临床和社区环境中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Benefits of using both the Hunger Vital Sign and brief nutrition security screener in health-related social needs screening.

Food security is a commonly screened for health-related social need at hospitals and community settings, and until recently, there were no tools to additionally screen for nutrition security. The purpose of this study was to assess the potential advantage of including a one-item brief nutrition security screener (BNSS) alongside the commonly used two-item Hunger Vital Sign (HVS) food security screener for identifying individuals with diet-related health risks. Cross-sectional survey data were collected from April to June 2021. Generalized linear mixed models were used to assess associations between screening status and dietary and health variables. Recruitment was done across five states (California, Florida, Maryland, North Carolina, and Washington) from community-based organizations. Participants (n = 435) were, on average, 44.7 years old (SD = 14.5), predominantly women (77%), and racially/ethnically diverse. In adjusted analyses, being in the food insecure and nutrition insecure group (but not the food insecure and nutrition secure or food secure and nutrition insecure groups) was associated with significantly increased odds for self-reported "fair" or "poor" general health [OR = 2.914 (95% CI = 1.521-5.581)], reporting at least one chronic condition [2.028 (1.024-4.018)], and "low" fruit and vegetable intake [2.421 (1.258-4.660)], compared with the food secure and nutrition secure group. These findings support using both the HVS and BNSS simultaneously in health-related social needs screening to identify participants at the highest risk for poor dietary and health outcomes and warrant further investigation into applying these screeners to clinical and community settings.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Translational Behavioral Medicine
Translational Behavioral Medicine PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH -
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
87
期刊介绍: Translational Behavioral Medicine publishes content that engages, informs, and catalyzes dialogue about behavioral medicine among the research, practice, and policy communities. TBM began receiving an Impact Factor in 2015 and currently holds an Impact Factor of 2.989. TBM is one of two journals published by the Society of Behavioral Medicine. The Society of Behavioral Medicine is a multidisciplinary organization of clinicians, educators, and scientists dedicated to promoting the study of the interactions of behavior with biology and the environment, and then applying that knowledge to improve the health and well-being of individuals, families, communities, and populations.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信