A process evaluation of the Supermarket Healthy Eating for Life (SHELf) randomized controlled trial


Autoria(s): Olstad, Dana Lee; Ball, Kylie; Abbott, Gavin; McNaughton, Sarah A.; Le, Ha N. D.; Mhurchu, Cliona Ni; Pollard, Christina; Crawford, David A.
Data(s)

24/02/2016

Resumo

BACKGROUND: Supermarket Healthy Eating for Life (SHELf) was a randomized controlled trial that operationalized a socioecological approach to population-level dietary behaviour change in a real-world supermarket setting. SHELf tested the impact of individual (skill-building), environmental (20 % price reductions), and combined (skill-building + 20 % price reductions) interventions on women's purchasing and consumption of fruits, vegetables, low-calorie carbonated beverages and water. This process evaluation investigated the reach, effectiveness, implementation, and maintenance of the SHELf interventions. <br /><br />METHODS: RE-AIM provided a conceptual framework to examine the processes underlying the impact of the interventions using data from participant surveys and objective sales data collected at baseline, post-intervention (3 months) and 6-months post-intervention. Fisher's exact, χ (2) and t-tests assessed differences in quantitative survey responses among groups. Adjusted linear regression examined the impact of self-reported intervention dose on food purchasing and consumption outcomes. Thematic analysis identified key themes within qualitative survey responses. <br /><br />RESULTS: Reach of the SHELf interventions to disadvantaged groups, and beyond study participants themselves, was moderate. Just over one-third of intervention participants indicated that the interventions were effective in changing the way they bought, cooked or consumed food (p < 0.001 compared to control), with no differences among intervention groups. Improvements in purchasing and consumption outcomes were greatest among those who received a higher intervention dose. Most notably, participants who said they accessed price reductions on fruits and vegetables purchased (519 g/week) and consumed (0.5 servings/day) more vegetables. The majority of participants said they accessed (82 %) and appreciated discounts on fruits and vegetables, while there was limited use (40 %) and appreciation of discounts on low-calorie carbonated beverages and water. Overall reported satisfaction with, use, and impact of the skill-building resources was moderate. Maintenance of newly acquired behaviours was limited, with less than half of participants making changes or using study-provided resources during the 6-month post-intervention period. <br /><br />CONCLUSIONS: SHELf's reach and perceived effectiveness were moderate. The interventions were more effective among those reporting greater engagement with them (an implementation-related construct). Maintenance of newly acquired behaviours proved challenging.<br />

Identificador

http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30081935

Idioma(s)

eng

Publicador

BioMed Central

Relação

http://dro.deakin.edu.au/eserv/DU:30081935/olstad-aprocessevaluation-2016.pdf

http://www.dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12966-016-0352-3

Direitos

2016, The Authors

Palavras-Chave #process evaluation #dietary behaviours #fruits and vegetables #carbonated beverages #water #food consumption #food purchasing #women #supermarkets #RE-AIM
Tipo

Journal Article