| Literature DB >> 25245213 |
Jonine Maree Jancey1, Sarojini Maria Dos Remedios Monteiro, Satvinder S Dhaliwal, Peter A Howat, Sharyn Burns, Andrew P Hills, Annie S Anderson.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Unhealthy dietary behaviours are one of the key risk factors for many lifestyle-related diseases worldwide. This randomised controlled trial aimed to increase the level of fruit, vegetable and fibre intake and decrease the fat and sugar consumption of mothers with young children (0-5 years) via the playgroup setting.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25245213 PMCID: PMC4177414 DOI: 10.1186/s12966-014-0120-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act ISSN: 1479-5868 Impact factor: 6.457
Description of intervention linked to behaviour change theory
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Orientation to the diet intervention (Week 1) | Distribution of resources (booklet, menu planner, recipe booklet) containing information on healthy eating (increasing fruit, vegetables and fibre and reducing fat and sugar-sweetened beverages) | expectation and expectancies; Self-efficacy (SCT) |
| Barriers and benefits to a healthy diet and overcoming barriers | ||
| Behaviour change (week 5) | Goal setting - diet | behavioural capabilities; self-efficacy |
| Family dinner planner & food record sheet | Observational (SCT and TTM) | |
| Activity with healthy dinner planner | ||
| Newsletter | ||
| Monitoring progress (week 9) | Review established goals | behavioural capabilities; self-control; social support; reciprocal determinism; reinforcement (SCT); MI |
| Set new short term goals | ||
| Support networks | ||
| Review resources | ||
| Newsletter | ||
| Monitoring progress (week 13) | Review established goals | self-control; social support; reciprocal determinism(SCT); MI |
| Set new short term goals | ||
| Menu planning | ||
| Shopping list with healthy tips | ||
| Reading food labels | ||
| Newsletter | ||
| Reinforcing messages/information (week 17) | Overcoming relapses | Social support; observational, reinforcement (SCT) |
| Support networks | ||
| Modify recipes to make healthier | ||
| Healthy cooking methods | ||
| Newsletter | ||
| Review and feedback (week 21) | Review of goals; review of program; | Social support; observational, behavioural capabilities (SCT) |
| Fibre and glycaemic index | ||
| Modified recipes/healthy cooking methods | ||
| Newsletter |
Figure 1Flow chart of recruitment process.
Baseline characteristics of intervention and control groups
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| ||
| AGE | 35.9 ± 4.3 | 35.6 ± 4.3 | n.s. |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 0.081 | ||
| <25 | 73 (54.5%) | 116 (67.1%) | |
| ≥25 and <30 | 47 (35.1%) | 44 (25.4%) | |
| ≥30 | 14 (10.4%) | 13 (7.5%) | |
| Vegetable consumption | n.s. | ||
| Below recommendation | 212 (85.1%) | 215 (79.0%) | |
| Met Recommendation | 35 (14.1%) | 55 (20.2%) | |
| Above Recommendation | 2 (0.8%) | 2 (0.7%) | |
| Fruit consumption | 0.036 | ||
| Below recommendation | 157 (63.3%) | 143 (52.6%) | |
| Met Recommendation | 75 (30.2%) | 101 (37.1%) | |
| Above Recommendation | 16 (6.5%) | 28 (10.3%) | |
| Pregnant, breastfeeding or postpartum | 103 (41.4%) | 95 (34.9%) | n.s. |
| Parity | n.s. | ||
| 1 child | 82 (32.9%) | 94 (34.6%) | |
| ≥2 child | 167 (67.1%) | 178 (65.4%) | |
| Married or De facto | 245 (98.8%) | 265 (98.1%) | n.s. |
| University degree or higher | 127 (51.0%) | 170 (62.5%) | 0.008 |
| Not employed | 99 (39.8%) | 94 (34.7%) | n.s. |
| Annual household income (AUD) | n.s. | ||
| <$51,000 | 32 (13.4%) | 27 (10.1%) | |
| ≥$51,000 to < $101,000 | 95 (39.9%) | 107 (39.9%) | |
| ≥$101,000 | 111 (46.6%) | 134 (50.0%) | |
| SEIFA score | <0.0005 | ||
| Least disadvantaged | 95 (38.6%) | 147 (54.9%) | |
| Less disadvantage | 83 (33.7%) | 21 (7.8%) | |
| Average disadvantage | 34 (13.8%) | 55 (20.5%) | |
| Disadvantaged | 20 (8.1%) | 36 (13.4%) | |
| Most disadvantaged | 14 (5.7%) | 9 (3.4%) |
Abbreviations: BMI body mass index, SEIFA socio-economic index for area. n.s.: p-value > 0.05.
Adjusted for baseline value of the corresponding variable and mothers age.
Comparison diet outcomes between intervention and control groups
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| Fat and fibre barometer | 3.63 ± 0.02 | 3.52 ± 0.02 | 0.12 | 0.07, 0.16 | <0.0005 |
| Fibre barometer | 3.47 ± 0.03 | 3.29 ± 0.02 | 0.17 | 0.10, 0.24 | <0.0005 |
| Fruits and vegetables | 3.39 ± 0.03 | 3.23 ± 0.03 | 0.16 | 0.08, 0.24 | <0.0005 |
| Wholegrain foods | 3.55 ± 0.04 | 3.39 ± 0.04 | 0.16 | 0.06, 0.26 | 0.002 |
| Fat barometer | 3.73 ± 0.02 | 3.65 ± 0.02 | 0.08 | 0.03, 0.14 | 0.005 |
| Dairy products | 3.37 ± 0.04 | 3.21 ± 0.04 | 0.17 | 0.05, 0.29 | 0.006 |
| Lean meat and chicken | 3.93 ± 0.04 | 3.81 ± 0.04 | 0.12 | 0, 0.24 | 0.041 |
|
| |||||
| Fruits (serves) | 2.26 ± 0.05 | 2.10 ± 0.05 | 0.16 | 0.01, 0.31 | 0.038 |
| Vegetables (serves) | 3.39 ± 0.08 | 3.05 ± 0.08 | 0.35 | 0.13, 0.56 | 0.002 |
| 100% fruit juice (serves) | 0.18 ± 0.04 | 0.13 ± 0.03 | 0.06 | −0.04, 0.16 | 0.239 |
| Soft drinks (cups) | 0.18 ± 0.05 | 0.25 ± 0.05 | −0.07 | −0.20, 0.06 | 0.309 |
| Flavoured drinks (cups) | 0.18 ± 0.03 | 0.21 ± 0.02 | −0.02 | −0.09, 0.05 | 0.517 |
Comparison between groups after adjustment for baseline value of the corresponding variable and mother’s age.
Figure 2Effect of intervention in changing consumption: Intervention -Control.