Caitlin E Caspi, Maria F Gombi-Vaca, Christina Bliss Barsness, Nora Gordon, Marna Canterbury, Hikaru Hanawa Peterson, Julian Wolfson, Rebekah Pratt
{"title":"基于选择的食品储藏室超货架干预的聚类随机评价。","authors":"Caitlin E Caspi, Maria F Gombi-Vaca, Christina Bliss Barsness, Nora Gordon, Marna Canterbury, Hikaru Hanawa Peterson, Julian Wolfson, Rebekah Pratt","doi":"10.1093/abm/kaad060","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Interventions in food pantry settings have the potential to improve health among clients at risk of diet-related disease.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study evaluates whether a cluster-randomized, behavioral intervention in food pantries resulted in improved client outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Sixteen Minnesota food pantries were randomized to an intervention (n = 8) or control condition (n = 8). The intervention offered pantries technical assistance to improve healthy food supply and implement behavioral economics strategies to promote healthy food selection. A convenience sample of adult clients were enrolled (paired sample, 158 intervention, 159 control) and followed for 1 year. Additional clients were enrolled at follow-up to assess food selection (follow-up sample, 85 intervention, 102 control). Analysis was limited to data from 11 pantries (5 intervention, 6 control) due to COVID-19. Outcome measures included Healthy Eating Index-2015 (HEI-2015) total and subcomponent scores for 24-hr dietary recalls and client cart selections, and Life's Simple 7 (LS7) total and subcomponent scores. Multilevel mixed-effects models tested whether client outcomes differed by intervention condition.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In adjusted models, there were no statistically significant differences by intervention condition in HEI-2015 or LS7 scores. Clients in intervention food pantries had improved Refined Grain subcomponent scores (p = .004); clients in control pantries had worsened Saturated Fat subcomponents scores (p = .019) and improved physical activity scores (p = .007).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The intervention did not result in improved diet quality or cardiovascular health as measured by HEI-2015 or LS7. Coordinated efforts across settings are needed to address health risks facing this population.</p>","PeriodicalId":7939,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Behavioral Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10831215/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Cluster-Randomized Evaluation of the SuperShelf Intervention in Choice-Based Food Pantries.\",\"authors\":\"Caitlin E Caspi, Maria F Gombi-Vaca, Christina Bliss Barsness, Nora Gordon, Marna Canterbury, Hikaru Hanawa Peterson, Julian Wolfson, Rebekah Pratt\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/abm/kaad060\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Interventions in food pantry settings have the potential to improve health among clients at risk of diet-related disease.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study evaluates whether a cluster-randomized, behavioral intervention in food pantries resulted in improved client outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Sixteen Minnesota food pantries were randomized to an intervention (n = 8) or control condition (n = 8). The intervention offered pantries technical assistance to improve healthy food supply and implement behavioral economics strategies to promote healthy food selection. A convenience sample of adult clients were enrolled (paired sample, 158 intervention, 159 control) and followed for 1 year. Additional clients were enrolled at follow-up to assess food selection (follow-up sample, 85 intervention, 102 control). Analysis was limited to data from 11 pantries (5 intervention, 6 control) due to COVID-19. Outcome measures included Healthy Eating Index-2015 (HEI-2015) total and subcomponent scores for 24-hr dietary recalls and client cart selections, and Life's Simple 7 (LS7) total and subcomponent scores. Multilevel mixed-effects models tested whether client outcomes differed by intervention condition.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In adjusted models, there were no statistically significant differences by intervention condition in HEI-2015 or LS7 scores. Clients in intervention food pantries had improved Refined Grain subcomponent scores (p = .004); clients in control pantries had worsened Saturated Fat subcomponents scores (p = .019) and improved physical activity scores (p = .007).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The intervention did not result in improved diet quality or cardiovascular health as measured by HEI-2015 or LS7. Coordinated efforts across settings are needed to address health risks facing this population.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7939,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Behavioral Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10831215/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Behavioral Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/abm/kaad060\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Behavioral Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/abm/kaad060","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
A Cluster-Randomized Evaluation of the SuperShelf Intervention in Choice-Based Food Pantries.
Background: Interventions in food pantry settings have the potential to improve health among clients at risk of diet-related disease.
Purpose: This study evaluates whether a cluster-randomized, behavioral intervention in food pantries resulted in improved client outcomes.
Methods: Sixteen Minnesota food pantries were randomized to an intervention (n = 8) or control condition (n = 8). The intervention offered pantries technical assistance to improve healthy food supply and implement behavioral economics strategies to promote healthy food selection. A convenience sample of adult clients were enrolled (paired sample, 158 intervention, 159 control) and followed for 1 year. Additional clients were enrolled at follow-up to assess food selection (follow-up sample, 85 intervention, 102 control). Analysis was limited to data from 11 pantries (5 intervention, 6 control) due to COVID-19. Outcome measures included Healthy Eating Index-2015 (HEI-2015) total and subcomponent scores for 24-hr dietary recalls and client cart selections, and Life's Simple 7 (LS7) total and subcomponent scores. Multilevel mixed-effects models tested whether client outcomes differed by intervention condition.
Results: In adjusted models, there were no statistically significant differences by intervention condition in HEI-2015 or LS7 scores. Clients in intervention food pantries had improved Refined Grain subcomponent scores (p = .004); clients in control pantries had worsened Saturated Fat subcomponents scores (p = .019) and improved physical activity scores (p = .007).
Conclusions: The intervention did not result in improved diet quality or cardiovascular health as measured by HEI-2015 or LS7. Coordinated efforts across settings are needed to address health risks facing this population.
期刊介绍:
Annals of Behavioral Medicine aims to foster the exchange of knowledge derived from the disciplines involved in the field of behavioral medicine, and the integration of biological, psychosocial, and behavioral factors and principles as they relate to such areas as health promotion, disease prevention, risk factor modification, disease progression, adjustment and adaptation to physical disorders, and rehabilitation. To achieve these goals, much of the journal is devoted to the publication of original empirical articles including reports of randomized controlled trials, observational studies, or other basic and clinical investigations. Integrative reviews of the evidence for the application of behavioral interventions in health care will also be provided. .