首页 | 官方网站   微博 | 高级检索  
     


Evaluating a Food Pantry–Based Intervention to Improve Food Security,Dietary Intake,and Quality in Midwestern Food Pantries
Affiliation:1. Department of Nutrition Science, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN;2. Science Department, Center for Science in the Public Interest, Washington, DC;3. Department of Biostatistics and Data Sciences, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC;4. Department of Statistics, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN;5. Department of Community Health and Health Behavior, University of Buffalo, Buffalo NY;6. Health and Nutritional Sciences, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD;7. US Department of Agriculture, National Institute of Food & Agriculture, Kansas City, MO;8. Nutrition and Health Sciences, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE;9. Michigan State University Extension, Lapeer, MI;10. Extension, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO;11. Extension, Ohio State University, Piketon, OH
Abstract:BackgroundVoices for Food was a longitudinal community, food pantry–based intervention informed by the social ecological model, and designed to improve food security, dietary intake, and quality among clients, which was carried out in 24 rural food pantries across 6 Midwestern states.ObjectiveOur objective was to evaluate changes in adult food security, dietary intake, and quality from baseline (2014) to follow-up (2016), and to assess the role of adult food security on dietary outcomes.DesignA multistate, longitudinal, quasi-experimental intervention with matched treatment and comparison design was used to evaluate treatment vs comparison group changes over time and changes in both groups over time.Participants/settingAdult food pantry clients (n = 617) completed a demographic food security survey, and up to three 24-hour dietary recalls at baseline (n = 590) and follow-up (n = 160).InterventionCommunity coaching served as the experimental component, which only “treatment” communities received, and a food council guide and food pantry toolkit were provided to both “treatment” and matched “comparison” communities.Main outcome measuresChange in adult food security status, mean usual intakes of nutrients and food groups, and Healthy Eating Index-2010 scores were the main outcome measures.Statistical analyses performedLinear mixed models estimated changes in outcomes by intervention group and by adult food security status over time.ResultsImprovements in adult food security score (–0.7 ± 0.3; P = .01), Healthy Eating Index-2010 total score (4.2 ± 1.1; P < .0001), and empty calories component score (3.4 ± 0.5; P <.0001) from baseline to follow-up were observed in treatment and comparison groups, but no statistically significant changes were found for adult food security status, dietary quality, and usual intakes of nutrients and food groups between the 2 groups over time. The intervention effect on dietary quality and usual intake changes over time by adult food security status were also not observed.ConclusionsFood pantry clients in treatment and comparison groups had higher food security and dietary quality at the follow-up evaluation of the Voices for Food intervention trial compared with baseline, despite the lack of difference among the groups as a result of the experimental coaching component.
Keywords:Diet quality  Food security  Emergency food assistance  Healthy Eating Index  Food pantry intervention
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司    京ICP备09084417号-23

京公网安备 11010802026262号