BACKGROUND: Eat for Life, a multicomponent intervention to increase fruit and vegetable (F & V) consumption among African Americans, is delivered through African American churches. METHODS:Fourteen churches were randomly assigned to one of three treatment conditions: 1) comparison; 2) culturally-sensitive multicomponent intervention with one phone call; and 3) culturally-sensitive multicomponent intervention with four phone calls. The intervention included an 18-minute video, a project cookbook, printed health education materials, and several "cues" imprinted with the project logo and a 5 A Day message. A key element of the telephone intervention was the use of motivational interviewing, a counseling technique originally developed for addictive behaviors. Major outcomes for the trial included total F & V intake, assessed by food-frequency questionnaires (FFQs) and 24-hour recalls, and serum carotenoids. Psychosocial variables assessed included outcome expectations, barriers to F & V intake, preference for meat meals, neophobia, social support to eat more F & V, self-efficacy to eat more F & V, and nutrition knowledge. RESULTS: Baseline mean F & V intakes across the three FFQs ranged from 3.45 to 4.28 servings per day. Intake based on a single 24-hour recall was 3.0 servings. Variables positively correlated with F & V intake included self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and a belief that F & V contain vitamins. Factors negatively correlated with intake include perceived barriers, meat preference, neophobia, and high-fat cooking practices. The completion rate for the first telephone counseling call was 90%. Completion rates for the remaining three calls ranged from 79% to 86%. CONCLUSION: The recruitment and intervention methods of the Eat for Life study appear promising. The telephone intervention based on motivational interviewing is potentially useful for delivering dietary counseling.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Eat for Life, a multicomponent intervention to increase fruit and vegetable (F & V) consumption among African Americans, is delivered through African American churches. METHODS: Fourteen churches were randomly assigned to one of three treatment conditions: 1) comparison; 2) culturally-sensitive multicomponent intervention with one phone call; and 3) culturally-sensitive multicomponent intervention with four phone calls. The intervention included an 18-minute video, a project cookbook, printed health education materials, and several "cues" imprinted with the project logo and a 5 A Day message. A key element of the telephone intervention was the use of motivational interviewing, a counseling technique originally developed for addictive behaviors. Major outcomes for the trial included total F & V intake, assessed by food-frequency questionnaires (FFQs) and 24-hour recalls, and serum carotenoids. Psychosocial variables assessed included outcome expectations, barriers to F & V intake, preference for meat meals, neophobia, social support to eat more F & V, self-efficacy to eat more F & V, and nutrition knowledge. RESULTS: Baseline mean F & V intakes across the three FFQs ranged from 3.45 to 4.28 servings per day. Intake based on a single 24-hour recall was 3.0 servings. Variables positively correlated with F & V intake included self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and a belief that F & V contain vitamins. Factors negatively correlated with intake include perceived barriers, meat preference, neophobia, and high-fat cooking practices. The completion rate for the first telephone counseling call was 90%. Completion rates for the remaining three calls ranged from 79% to 86%. CONCLUSION: The recruitment and intervention methods of the Eat for Life study appear promising. The telephone intervention based on motivational interviewing is potentially useful for delivering dietary counseling.
Authors: Marlyn Allicock; Marci K Campbell; Carmina G Valle; Carol Carr; Ken Resnicow; Ziya Gizlice Journal: J Nutr Educ Behav Date: 2012-03-09 Impact factor: 3.045
Authors: Sara Wilcox; Marilyn Laken; Allen W Parrott; Margaret Condrasky; Ruth Saunders; Cheryl L Addy; Rebecca Evans; Meghan Baruth; May Samuel Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2010-03-30 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Penny A Ralston; Jennifer L Lemacks; Kandauda K A S Wickrama; Iris Young-Clark; Catherine Coccia; Jasminka Z Ilich; Cynthia M Harris; Celeste B Hart; Arrie M Battle; Catherine Walker O'Neal Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2014-03-28 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Daniel S Blumenthal; Jane G Fort; Nasar U Ahmed; Kofi A Semenya; George B Schreiber; Shelley Perry; Joyce Guillory Journal: J Natl Med Assoc Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 1.798
Authors: Richard A Falcone; Anita L Brentley; Crystal D Ricketts; Sheryl E Allen; Victor F Garcia Journal: J Natl Med Assoc Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 1.798