BACKGROUND: Recent attempts to improve the healthfulness of away-from-home eating include regulations requiring restaurants to post nutrition information. The impact of such regulations on restaurant environments is unknown. PURPOSE: To examine changes in restaurant environments from before to after nutrition-labeling regulation in a newly regulated county versus a nonregulated county. METHODS: Using the Nutrition Environment Measures Survey-Restaurant version audit, environments within the same quick-service chain restaurants were evaluated in King County (regulated) before and 6 and 18 months after regulation enforcement and in Multnomah County (nonregulated) restaurants over a 6-month period. Data were collected in 2008-2010 and analyses conducted in 2011. RESULTS: Overall availability of healthy options and facilitation of healthy eating did not increase differentially in King County versus Multnomah County restaurants aside from the substantial increase in onsite nutrition information posting in King County restaurants required by the new regulation. Barriers to healthful eating decreased in King County relative to Multnomah County restaurants, particularly in food-oriented establishments. King County restaurants demonstrated modest increases in signage that promotes healthy eating, although the frequency of such promotion remained low, and the availability of reduced portions decreased in these restaurants. The healthfulness of children's menus improved modestly over time, but not differentially by county. CONCLUSIONS: A restaurant nutrition-labeling regulation was accompanied by some, but not uniform, improvements in other aspects of restaurant environments in the regulated compared to the nonregulated county. Additional opportunities exist for improving the healthfulness of away-from-home eating beyond menu labeling.
BACKGROUND: Recent attempts to improve the healthfulness of away-from-home eating include regulations requiring restaurants to post nutrition information. The impact of such regulations on restaurant environments is unknown. PURPOSE: To examine changes in restaurant environments from before to after nutrition-labeling regulation in a newly regulated county versus a nonregulated county. METHODS: Using the Nutrition Environment Measures Survey-Restaurant version audit, environments within the same quick-service chain restaurants were evaluated in King County (regulated) before and 6 and 18 months after regulation enforcement and in Multnomah County (nonregulated) restaurants over a 6-month period. Data were collected in 2008-2010 and analyses conducted in 2011. RESULTS: Overall availability of healthy options and facilitation of healthy eating did not increase differentially in King County versus Multnomah County restaurants aside from the substantial increase in onsite nutrition information posting in King County restaurants required by the new regulation. Barriers to healthful eating decreased in King County relative to Multnomah County restaurants, particularly in food-oriented establishments. King County restaurants demonstrated modest increases in signage that promotes healthy eating, although the frequency of such promotion remained low, and the availability of reduced portions decreased in these restaurants. The healthfulness of children's menus improved modestly over time, but not differentially by county. CONCLUSIONS: A restaurant nutrition-labeling regulation was accompanied by some, but not uniform, improvements in other aspects of restaurant environments in the regulated compared to the nonregulated county. Additional opportunities exist for improving the healthfulness of away-from-home eating beyond menu labeling.
Authors: LaVonna Blair Lewis; David C Sloane; Lori Miller Nascimento; Allison L Diamant; Joyce Jones Guinyard; Antronette K Yancey; Gwendolyn Flynn Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Pooja S Tandon; Chuan Zhou; Nadine L Chan; Paula Lozano; Sarah C Couch; Karen Glanz; James Krieger; Brian E Saelens Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Roxana Chen; Michael Smyser; Nadine Chan; Myduc Ta; Brian E Saelens; James Krieger Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2015-01-20 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Kathryn M Neckerman; Laszlo Lovasi; Paulette Yousefzadeh; Daniel Sheehan; Karla Milinkovic; Aileen Baecker; Michael D M Bader; Christopher Weiss; Gina S Lovasi; Andrew Rundle Journal: J Acad Nutr Diet Date: 2013-09-12 Impact factor: 4.910
Authors: F C Hillier-Brown; C D Summerbell; H J Moore; A Routen; A A Lake; J Adams; M White; V Araujo-Soares; C Abraham; A J Adamson; T J Brown Journal: Obes Rev Date: 2016-11-29 Impact factor: 9.213