英格兰中学的学校食品政策及其对青少年饮食和牙齿健康的影响:FUEL 多方法研究。

Miranda Pallan, Marie Murphy, Breanna Morrison, Irina Pokhilenko, Alice Sitch, Emma Frew, Clare Rawdin, Rachel Adams, Ashley Adamson, Suzanne Bartington, Alexandra Dobell, Rhona Duff, Tania Griffin, Kiya Hurley, Emma Lancashire, Louise McLeman, Sandra Passmore, Vahid Ravaghi, Suzanne Spence, Peymane Adab
{"title":"英格兰中学的学校食品政策及其对青少年饮食和牙齿健康的影响:FUEL 多方法研究。","authors":"Miranda Pallan, Marie Murphy, Breanna Morrison, Irina Pokhilenko, Alice Sitch, Emma Frew, Clare Rawdin, Rachel Adams, Ashley Adamson, Suzanne Bartington, Alexandra Dobell, Rhona Duff, Tania Griffin, Kiya Hurley, Emma Lancashire, Louise McLeman, Sandra Passmore, Vahid Ravaghi, Suzanne Spence, Peymane Adab","doi":"10.3310/TTPL8570","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>School food standards are a legal requirement for state-funded schools in England and are designed to promote healthy eating in pupils. However, state-funded academies/free schools established between 2010 and 2014 are exempt from this legislation. To complement the school food standards, the government launched the School Food Plan in 2013, which outlines voluntary actions that schools can take to support healthy eating and increase school meal uptake. There has been little evaluation of the school food standards and School Food Plan in secondary schools.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare implementation and costs of the school food standards and School Food Plan, and pupil dietary and dental outcomes in two groups of secondary schools: those mandated and those not mandated to comply with the school food standards legislation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An observational, multiple-methods study. We sampled state-funded secondary school academies/free schools, pupils aged 11-15 years, and school staff/governors with a role in food provision/education from the Midlands. We collected qualitative data in four schools. The primary outcome was pupil free sugar intake at lunch; across the school day; and during 24-hours. Secondary outcomes were additional nutritional outcomes and dental caries measures. We assessed school food standards/School Food Plan implementation and costs using researcher observation, document analysis, and surveys with staff/governors, schools and pupils. Dietary intake and dental outcomes were measured online using 24-hour dietary recall and surveys, respectively. In the qualitative study we conducted staff/governor interviews and pupil focus groups in a subsample of schools. We used multilevel analyses to explore variation in pupil outcomes across the school food standards-mandated and school food standards-non-mandated school groups. Data were analysed using the Framework approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-six schools (13 school food standards-mandated, 23 school food standards-non-mandated), 2453 pupils and 151 staff/governors participated. On average, schools were compliant with 64% of school food standards and implemented 41% of School Food Plan actions, with no differences across school food standards-mandated/non-mandated schools. There was a wide variation in annual costs of the school food standards and School Food Plan reported by schools (mean of £195 per pupil). Pupils in school food standards-mandated schools had lower lunch intakes of free sugar than those in school food standards-non-mandated schools (adjusted mean difference = -2.78 g, 95% confidence interval -4.66 to -0.90 g). After further adjustment for total energy intake, there was no significant difference in free sugar intake, but the school food standards-mandated group had lower fruit and vegetable intake at all time points, and higher consumption of confectionery during the school day and sugar-sweetened beverages over 24 hours. There were no differences in dental outcomes between the two groups. Twenty-one staff/governors and 137 pupils participated in the qualitative study. Staff described balancing school food standards compliance with conflicting priorities related to financial viability. Some pupils felt that school food did not meet their needs for convenience, speed, value for money and taste, and disliked the lunchtime experience. Little time was afforded to healthy-eating education within the curriculum.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>There were large numbers of missing data for some study elements, including assessment of some School Food Plan actions and cost data.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In the secondary school context, the current school food standards are difficult to comply with and the School Food Plan has not achieved the desired outcomes. We found no evidence to show that school food standards legislation has positively influenced nutritional intake.</p><p><strong>Future research: </strong>We need to develop healthy secondary-school food provision models that meet pupils' preferences, and better understand how to situate the food and healthy-eating agenda in secondary schools.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>This trial is registered as ISRCTN68757496.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme (NIHR award ref: 17/92/39) and is published in full in <i>Public Health Research</i>; Vol. 12, No. 12. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.</p>","PeriodicalId":74615,"journal":{"name":"Public health research (Southampton, England)","volume":"12 12","pages":"1-167"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"School food policy in secondary schools in England and its impact on adolescents' diets and dental health: the FUEL multiple-methods study.\",\"authors\":\"Miranda Pallan, Marie Murphy, Breanna Morrison, Irina Pokhilenko, Alice Sitch, Emma Frew, Clare Rawdin, Rachel Adams, Ashley Adamson, Suzanne Bartington, Alexandra Dobell, Rhona Duff, Tania Griffin, Kiya Hurley, Emma Lancashire, Louise McLeman, Sandra Passmore, Vahid Ravaghi, Suzanne Spence, Peymane Adab\",\"doi\":\"10.3310/TTPL8570\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>School food standards are a legal requirement for state-funded schools in England and are designed to promote healthy eating in pupils. However, state-funded academies/free schools established between 2010 and 2014 are exempt from this legislation. To complement the school food standards, the government launched the School Food Plan in 2013, which outlines voluntary actions that schools can take to support healthy eating and increase school meal uptake. There has been little evaluation of the school food standards and School Food Plan in secondary schools.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare implementation and costs of the school food standards and School Food Plan, and pupil dietary and dental outcomes in two groups of secondary schools: those mandated and those not mandated to comply with the school food standards legislation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An observational, multiple-methods study. We sampled state-funded secondary school academies/free schools, pupils aged 11-15 years, and school staff/governors with a role in food provision/education from the Midlands. We collected qualitative data in four schools. The primary outcome was pupil free sugar intake at lunch; across the school day; and during 24-hours. Secondary outcomes were additional nutritional outcomes and dental caries measures. We assessed school food standards/School Food Plan implementation and costs using researcher observation, document analysis, and surveys with staff/governors, schools and pupils. Dietary intake and dental outcomes were measured online using 24-hour dietary recall and surveys, respectively. In the qualitative study we conducted staff/governor interviews and pupil focus groups in a subsample of schools. We used multilevel analyses to explore variation in pupil outcomes across the school food standards-mandated and school food standards-non-mandated school groups. Data were analysed using the Framework approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-six schools (13 school food standards-mandated, 23 school food standards-non-mandated), 2453 pupils and 151 staff/governors participated. On average, schools were compliant with 64% of school food standards and implemented 41% of School Food Plan actions, with no differences across school food standards-mandated/non-mandated schools. There was a wide variation in annual costs of the school food standards and School Food Plan reported by schools (mean of £195 per pupil). Pupils in school food standards-mandated schools had lower lunch intakes of free sugar than those in school food standards-non-mandated schools (adjusted mean difference = -2.78 g, 95% confidence interval -4.66 to -0.90 g). After further adjustment for total energy intake, there was no significant difference in free sugar intake, but the school food standards-mandated group had lower fruit and vegetable intake at all time points, and higher consumption of confectionery during the school day and sugar-sweetened beverages over 24 hours. There were no differences in dental outcomes between the two groups. Twenty-one staff/governors and 137 pupils participated in the qualitative study. Staff described balancing school food standards compliance with conflicting priorities related to financial viability. Some pupils felt that school food did not meet their needs for convenience, speed, value for money and taste, and disliked the lunchtime experience. Little time was afforded to healthy-eating education within the curriculum.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>There were large numbers of missing data for some study elements, including assessment of some School Food Plan actions and cost data.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In the secondary school context, the current school food standards are difficult to comply with and the School Food Plan has not achieved the desired outcomes. We found no evidence to show that school food standards legislation has positively influenced nutritional intake.</p><p><strong>Future research: </strong>We need to develop healthy secondary-school food provision models that meet pupils' preferences, and better understand how to situate the food and healthy-eating agenda in secondary schools.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>This trial is registered as ISRCTN68757496.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme (NIHR award ref: 17/92/39) and is published in full in <i>Public Health Research</i>; Vol. 12, No. 12. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74615,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Public health research (Southampton, England)\",\"volume\":\"12 12\",\"pages\":\"1-167\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Public health research (Southampton, England)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3310/TTPL8570\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public health research (Southampton, England)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3310/TTPL8570","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:学校食品标准是英格兰国家资助学校的一项法律要求,旨在促进学生的健康饮食。不过,在 2010 年至 2014 年期间成立的国家资助学院/免费学校不受这项法律的约束。作为对学校食品标准的补充,政府于 2013 年推出了 "学校食品计划",该计划概述了学校可采取的自愿行动,以支持健康饮食并提高校餐摄入量。对中学学校食品标准和学校食品计划的评估很少:比较学校食品标准和 "学校食品计划 "的实施情况和成本,以及两类中学学生的膳食和牙齿状况:一类中学必须遵守学校食品标准法规,另一类中学则不必须遵守:方法:观察性多方法研究。我们抽样调查了中部地区由国家资助的中学学院/免费学校、11-15 岁的学生以及学校负责食品供应/教育的教职员工/校监。我们在四所学校收集了定性数据。主要结果是学生午餐、全天和 24 小时的免费糖摄入量。次要结果是其他营养结果和龋齿测量结果。我们通过研究人员的观察、文件分析以及对员工/校董、学校和学生的调查,对学校食品标准/学校食品计划的实施情况和成本进行了评估。膳食摄入量和牙科治疗效果分别通过 24 小时膳食回忆和调查进行在线测量。在定性研究中,我们对部分学校进行了员工/校长访谈和学生焦点小组讨论。我们采用多层次分析方法,探讨了学校食品标准(强制)和学校食品标准(非强制)两类学校的学生成绩差异。数据采用框架方法进行分析:共有 36 所学校(13 所学校食品标准为强制性,23 所学校食品标准为非强制性)、2453 名学生和 151 名教职员工/管理者参与了研究。平均而言,64%的学校符合学校食品标准,41%的学校食品计划得到实施,学校食品标准强制学校和非强制学校之间没有差异。学校报告的学校食品标准和 "学校食品计划 "的年度成本差异很大(平均每名学生 195 英镑)。学校食品标准规定学校的学生午餐免费糖摄入量低于学校食品标准非规定学校的学生(调整后的平均差异=-2.78克,95%置信区间-4.66至-0.90克)。进一步调整总能量摄入量后,游离糖摄入量没有显著差异,但学校食品标准规定组在所有时间点的水果和蔬菜摄入量都较低,在校期间的糖果消费量和 24 小时内的含糖饮料消费量较高。两组学生的牙齿健康状况没有差异。21 名教职员工/校监和 137 名学生参与了定性研究。教职员工描述了在遵守学校食品标准和与财务可行性相关的优先事项之间取得平衡的情况。一些学生认为,学校食品不能满足他们对方便、快捷、物有所值和口味的需求,他们不喜欢午餐时间的体验。课程中健康饮食教育的时间很少:局限性:部分研究内容缺少大量数据,包括对一些学校食品计划行动的评估和成本数据:在中学环境中,现行的学校食品标准很难遵守,学校食品计划也没有达到预期的效果。我们没有发现任何证据表明学校食品标准立法对营养摄入产生了积极影响:未来研究:我们需要开发出符合学生喜好的健康中学食品供应模式,并更好地了解如何在中学制定食品和健康饮食议程:本试验的注册号为 ISRCTN68757496:该奖项由美国国家健康与护理研究所(NIHR)公共卫生研究计划资助(NIHR奖项编号:17/92/39),全文发表于《公共卫生研究》第12卷第12期。如需了解更多奖项信息,请访问 NIHR Funding and Awards 网站。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
School food policy in secondary schools in England and its impact on adolescents' diets and dental health: the FUEL multiple-methods study.

Background: School food standards are a legal requirement for state-funded schools in England and are designed to promote healthy eating in pupils. However, state-funded academies/free schools established between 2010 and 2014 are exempt from this legislation. To complement the school food standards, the government launched the School Food Plan in 2013, which outlines voluntary actions that schools can take to support healthy eating and increase school meal uptake. There has been little evaluation of the school food standards and School Food Plan in secondary schools.

Objectives: To compare implementation and costs of the school food standards and School Food Plan, and pupil dietary and dental outcomes in two groups of secondary schools: those mandated and those not mandated to comply with the school food standards legislation.

Methods: An observational, multiple-methods study. We sampled state-funded secondary school academies/free schools, pupils aged 11-15 years, and school staff/governors with a role in food provision/education from the Midlands. We collected qualitative data in four schools. The primary outcome was pupil free sugar intake at lunch; across the school day; and during 24-hours. Secondary outcomes were additional nutritional outcomes and dental caries measures. We assessed school food standards/School Food Plan implementation and costs using researcher observation, document analysis, and surveys with staff/governors, schools and pupils. Dietary intake and dental outcomes were measured online using 24-hour dietary recall and surveys, respectively. In the qualitative study we conducted staff/governor interviews and pupil focus groups in a subsample of schools. We used multilevel analyses to explore variation in pupil outcomes across the school food standards-mandated and school food standards-non-mandated school groups. Data were analysed using the Framework approach.

Results: Thirty-six schools (13 school food standards-mandated, 23 school food standards-non-mandated), 2453 pupils and 151 staff/governors participated. On average, schools were compliant with 64% of school food standards and implemented 41% of School Food Plan actions, with no differences across school food standards-mandated/non-mandated schools. There was a wide variation in annual costs of the school food standards and School Food Plan reported by schools (mean of £195 per pupil). Pupils in school food standards-mandated schools had lower lunch intakes of free sugar than those in school food standards-non-mandated schools (adjusted mean difference = -2.78 g, 95% confidence interval -4.66 to -0.90 g). After further adjustment for total energy intake, there was no significant difference in free sugar intake, but the school food standards-mandated group had lower fruit and vegetable intake at all time points, and higher consumption of confectionery during the school day and sugar-sweetened beverages over 24 hours. There were no differences in dental outcomes between the two groups. Twenty-one staff/governors and 137 pupils participated in the qualitative study. Staff described balancing school food standards compliance with conflicting priorities related to financial viability. Some pupils felt that school food did not meet their needs for convenience, speed, value for money and taste, and disliked the lunchtime experience. Little time was afforded to healthy-eating education within the curriculum.

Limitations: There were large numbers of missing data for some study elements, including assessment of some School Food Plan actions and cost data.

Conclusions: In the secondary school context, the current school food standards are difficult to comply with and the School Food Plan has not achieved the desired outcomes. We found no evidence to show that school food standards legislation has positively influenced nutritional intake.

Future research: We need to develop healthy secondary-school food provision models that meet pupils' preferences, and better understand how to situate the food and healthy-eating agenda in secondary schools.

Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN68757496.

Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme (NIHR award ref: 17/92/39) and is published in full in Public Health Research; Vol. 12, No. 12. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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