1.
Effect of a Parent-Focused eHealth Intervention on Children's Fruit, Vegetable, and Discretionary Food Intake (Food4toddlers): Randomized Controlled Trial.
Røed, M, Medin, AC, Vik, FN, Hillesund, ER, Van Lippevelde, W, Campbell, K, Øverby, NC
Journal of medical Internet research. 2021;23(2):e18311
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Diet in childhood tends to reflect that in adolescence and adulthood and so healthy eating habits established during this time may prevent increased weight, non-communicable diseases and even cancer. Healthy diet promotion to parents may be able to ensure that a healthy food environment is established, which will then continue throughout life. This randomised controlled trial of 404 parents aimed to determine the effect of parent-focused healthy food promotion via the internet for 12 months. The results showed that after 6 months that frequency of vegetable intake increased but this was not seen at 12 months. No differences were seen in the frequency of intake of sweet foods at either time point. It was concluded that intervention through a web-based healthy diet programme increased vegetable intake in the short-term, however in the long-term a personalised intervention or reminders may be needed. This study could be used by healthcare professionals to understand the importance of establishing a healthy diet from a young age and that parental support may be required to do this.
Abstract
BACKGROUND In Western countries, children's diets are often low in fruits and vegetables and high in discretionary foods. Diet in early life tends to track through childhood and youth and even into adulthood. Interventions should, therefore, be delivered in periods when habitual traits are established, as in toddlerhood when children adapt to their family's diet. OBJECTIVE In this study, we assessed the effect of the Food4toddlers eHealth intervention, which aimed to enhance toddlers' diets by shaping their food and eating environment. METHODS The Food4toddlers randomized controlled trial was conducted in Norway in 2017-2018. Parent-child dyads were recruited through social media. In total, 298 parents completed an online questionnaire at baseline (mean child age 10.9 months, SD 1.2). Postintervention questionnaires were completed immediately after the intervention (ie, follow-up 1; mean child age 17.8 months, SD 1.3) and 6 months after the intervention (ie, follow-up 2; mean child age 24.2 months, SD 1.9). The intervention was guided by social cognitive theory, which targets the linked relationship between the person, the behavior, and the environment. The intervention group (148/298, 49.7%) got access to the Food4toddlers website for 6 months from baseline. The website included information on diet and on how to create a healthy food and eating environment as well as activities, recipes, and collaboration opportunities. To assess intervention effects on child diet from baseline to follow-up 1 and from baseline to follow-up 2, we used generalized estimating equations and a time × group interaction term. Between-group differences in changes over time for frequency and variety of fruits and vegetables and frequency of discretionary foods were assessed. RESULTS At follow-up 1, a significant time × group interaction was observed for the frequency of vegetable intake (P=.02). The difference between groups in the change from baseline to follow-up 1 was 0.46 vegetable items per day (95% CI 0.06-0.86) in favor of the intervention group. No other significant between-group differences in dietary changes from baseline to follow-up 1 or follow-up 2 were observed. However, there is a clear time trend showing that the intake of discretionary foods increases by time from less than 1 item per week at baseline to more than 4 items per week at 2 years of age (P<.001), regardless of group. CONCLUSIONS A positive intervention effect was observed for the frequency of vegetable intake at follow-up 1 but not at follow-up 2. No other between-group effects on diet were observed. eHealth interventions of longer duration, including reminders after the main content of the intervention has been delivered, may be needed to obtain long-terms effects, along with tailoring in a digital or a personal form. TRIAL REGISTRATION International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) 92980420; https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN92980420.
2.
Effect of a family and interdisciplinary intervention to prevent T2D: randomized clinical trial.
Vargas-Ortiz, K, Lira-Mendiola, G, Gómez-Navarro, CM, Padilla-Estrada, K, Angulo-Romero, F, Hernández-Márquez, JM, Villa-Martínez, AK, González-Mena, JN, Macías-Cervantes, MH, Reyes-Escogido, ML, et al
BMC public health. 2020;20(1):97
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
In individuals at high risk of type 2 diabetes, lifestyle interventions rather than medication have been more successful in preventing development of the disease, however the benefits of lifestyle strategies diminishes over time due to possible adherence issues. Prolonged lifestyle changes may be affected by lack of family support, but research on family support during lifestyle changes in individuals prior to diabetes is lacking. This parallel randomised control trial of 122 patients with prediabetes and 101 of their family members aimed to assess the impact of family supported diet and exercise changes compared to self-motivation on individuals with prediabetes. At 6 months, body measurements and markers of prediabetes improved in both groups. Lipids were significantly improved in the group with family support compared to having no support. At 12 months there were a high number of dropouts due to lack of patient interest. Benefits shown at 6 months in both groups were only maintained or improved upon with family support and the lipid profile of the individual intervention group actually worsened in comparison to when participants entered the trial. After 12 months the incidence rate of type 2 diabetes was similar in both groups. Individuals with prediabetes who had family support whilst undergoing a diet and exercise regime were more successful at maintaining improvements of factors contributing to diabetes, compared to individuals without support. However this did not affect the occurrence of type 2 diabetes. Clinicians could use this paper to communicate the importance of family support during lifestyle changes in patients at high risk of developing type 2 diabetes, although close monitoring may be required to ensure compliance.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Lifestyle changes can reduce the risk of T2D; however, no study has evaluated the effect of a lifestyle intervention involving patients´ family. The aim of this study was to compare the impact of an interdisciplinary family (FI) Vs individual intervention (II) on glucose metabolism, insulin resistance (IR), pancreatic β-cell function and cardiovascular risk markers in patients with prediabetes, as well as to measure the impact on their families' metabolic risk. METHODS Randomized Clinical Trial (RCT) to compare the impact of FI and II on IR and pancreatic β-cell function in subjects with prediabetes. There were 122 subjects with prediabetes (and 101 family members) randomized to FI or II. Data were collected in 2015-2016 and analyzed in 2017-2018. FI group had the support of their family members, who also received personalized diet and exercise recommendations; patients and their family members attended monthly a lifestyle enhancement program. II group received personalized diet and exercise recommendations. The follow-up was for 12 months. Glucose, IR, pancreatic β-cell function and secondary outcomes (body composition and lipid profile) were assessed at baseline, 6 and 12 months. RESULTS FI group improved area under the glucose curve (AUC) (from 18,597 ± 2611 to 17,237 ± 2792, p = 0.004) and the Matsuda index (from 3.5 ± 2.3 to 4.7 ± 3.5, p = 0.05) at 12 months. II group improved Disposition Index (from 1.5 ± 0.4 to 1.9 ± 0.73, p < .0001) at 12 months. The improvements achieved in weight and lipids at 6 months, were lost in II group at 12 moths, whereas in FI persisted. Adherence up to 12 months was not different between the study groups (FI 56% Vs II 60%). CONCLUSIONS FI intervention was more effective by improving glucose AUC, insulin sensitivity and lipid profile, besides that, metabolic risk in family members of the FI group was maintained, while the risk of II group was increased. TRIAL REGISTRATION This study was retrospectively registered at clinicaltrials.gov on December 15, 2015 (NTC026365646).
3.
Eating at food outlets and leisure places and "on the go" is associated with less-healthy food choices than eating at home and in school in children: cross-sectional data from the UK National Diet and Nutrition Survey Rolling Program (2008-2014).
Ziauddeen, N, Page, P, Penney, TL, Nicholson, S, Kirk, SF, Almiron-Roig, E
The American journal of clinical nutrition. 2018;107(6):992-1003
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Poor diet in childhood and adolescence has been recognised as a risk factor for obesity during adulthood. Public health research has found the food environment to be an important determinant of diet, specifically for this age group, and the major environments are home, school, and food outlets/leisure places. The aim of this cross-sectional study is to provide a comprehensive analysis of the types of food consumed in each environment based on data from 4636 children and adolescents in the United Kingdom. This study showed the most common eating location across all age groups was at home, and this was associated with less sugar and takeaway food consumption. Based on these results, the authors conclude that home and school are both important areas to target for public health policy, however also highlight the importance of providing healthier food options for adolescents outside of these environments.
Abstract
Background: Where children eat has been linked to variations in diet quality, including the consumption of low-nutrient, energy-dense food, a recognized risk factor for obesity. Objective: The aim of this study was to provide a comprehensive analysis of consumption patterns and nutritional intake by eating location in British children with the use of a nationally representative survey. Design: Cross-sectional data from 4636 children (80,075 eating occasions) aged 1.5-18 y from the UK National Diet and Nutrition Survey Rolling Program (2008-2014) were analyzed. Eating locations were categorized as home, school, work, leisure places, food outlets, and "on the go." Foods were classified into core (considered important or acceptable within a healthy diet) and noncore (all other foods). Other variables included the percentage of meals eaten at home, sex, ethnicity, body mass index, income, frequency of eating out, takeaway meal consumption, alcohol consumption, and smoking. Results: The main eating location across all age groups was at home (69-79% of eating occasions), with the highest energy intakes. One-third of children from the least-affluent families consumed ≤25% of meals at home. Eating more at home was associated with less sugar and takeaway food consumption. Eating occasions in leisure places, food outlets, and "on the go" combined increased with age, from 5% (1.5-3 y) to 7% (11-18 y), with higher energy intakes from noncore foods in these locations. The school environment was associated with higher intakes of core foods and reduced intakes of noncore foods in children aged 4-10 y who ate school-sourced foods. Conclusions: Home and school eating are associated with better food choices, whereas other locations are associated with poor food choices. Effective, sustained initiatives targeted at behaviors and improving access to healthy foods in leisure centers and food outlets, including food sold to eat "on the go," may improve food choices. Home remains an important target for intervention through family and nutrition education, outreach, and social marketing campaigns. This trial was registered with the ISRTCN registry (https://www.isrctn.com) as ISRCTN17261407.