| Literature DB >> 30133467 |
Meena Daivadanam1,2,3, Rolf Wahlström2,4, T K Sundari Ravindran3, P Sankara Sarma3, S Sivasankaran5, K R Thankappan3.
Abstract
TRIALEntities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30133467 PMCID: PMC6104953 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0201877
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Randomization and selection for the cRCT from panchayat to individual levels.
(Source: Daivadanam et al. Glob Health Action 2013, 6: 20993, http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/gha.v6i0.20993).
General intervention strategies (i-iv): Mode, time-points and personnel responsible for delivery.
| S.No | Intervention strategy & description | Mode of delivery | Time-point of delivery | Responsible personnel |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Face-to-face using pre-defined format | Month 1 | Counselors–psychology students trained in brief intervention | ||
| Telephone using pre-defined format | Month 6 | Counselors–psychology students trained in brief intervention | ||
| Home visit: face-to-face | Months 1 & 6 (if there is a change of stage) | Community volunteers trained to deliver specific strategies | ||
| Telephone using pre-defined format | Months 3 & 9 | Community volunteers / study coordinator | ||
| Face-to-face | Month 3 & 9 | Study coordinator / community volunteer (if no response to telephone reminder calls) | ||
| Three group sessions for adults in each | 1) Months 2–3: Diet and NCDs 2) Months 4–5: Colour way to health 3) Months 9–10: Let us protect our family’s health | Sessions organized by community volunteers and conducted by psychology students trained with respect to materials and content | ||
| Two group sessions for children in each | Months 3–5: Diet and NCDs–concept of | Sessions organized by lay community volunteers and conducted by psychology students trained with respect to materials and content | ||
| Household staging tool developed as part of formative research [ | Month 0 & 6 | Community volunteers trained to use the tool |
*Additional details on intervention strategies have been published elsewhere [Glob Health Action 2013, 6: 20993, http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/gha.v6i0.20993].
Stage-matched intervention strategies (a-e): Mode, time-points and personnel responsible for delivery.
| S.No | Intervention strategy & description | Mode of delivery | Time-point of delivery | Responsible personnel |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Measurement kit and information booklet provided to each household—explained with practical examples during home visit | Month 1 and or 6 based on assessed stage of change of the household | Community volunteers trained to deliver intervention strategies | ||
| Highlighting three strategies identified through formative research and outlined in information booklet—explained with practical examples during home visit | Month 1 and or 6 based on assessed stage of change of the household | Community volunteers trained to deliver intervention strategies | ||
| Use of fruit basket provided in the household kit or removal of food items (high in salt, sugar and fat) from easily accessible locations—explained with practical examples during home visit | Month 1 and or 6 based on assessed stage of change of the household | Community volunteers trained to deliver intervention strategies | ||
| Enable household members to identify and record local varieties with the help of the information booklet—explained with practical examples during home visit | Month 1 and or 6 during home visit based on assessed stage of change of the household | Community volunteers trained to deliver intervention strategies | ||
| Using note pages in the information booklet to identify avoidable expenses—explained with practical example during home visit | Month 1 and or 6 based on assessed stage of change of the household | Community volunteers trained to deliver intervention strategies |
*Additional details on intervention strategies have been published elsewhere [Glob Health Action 2013, 6: 20993, http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/gha.v6i0.20993].
Definitions of outcome measures & behaviour change variables.
| Variables | Definitions | Data collection/extraction |
|---|---|---|
| | ||
| Intake estimated in servings separately for fruits and vegetables for an individual adult member of the HH and considered as proxy for per capita FV intake in the recruited HH. | FV intake in servings was extracted separately for fruits and vegetables from two 24-hour recalls of all foods consumed by the selected healthy adult member between 25–45 years in each recruited household → the average of the two was estimated as daily fruit or vegetable intake for the selected individual | |
| Per capita estimate in kilograms of all FV procured or purchased for 2 weeks in each recruited HH. | Per capita calculations based on the 2-week FV procurement diary which enabled free listing for all FV procured or purchased for 2 weeks in each recruited household | |
| Monthly per capita estimate in grams for salt, free sugars and oils or fats consumed in each recruited HH. | Calculated from monthly consumption details reported for salt, free sugars and oils or fats by each recruited household in the general questionnaire | |
| | ||
| Maintenance or increase to at least three vegetable servings by end-line | Constructed from the primary outcome variable: FV intake in servings | |
| Consumption of any fruit (measured in serving) by end-line | Constructed from the primary outcome variable: | |
| Increase of at least 50% in the 2-week per capita HH procurement of fruits | Constructed from the secondary outcome variable: | |
| Reduction of at least 10% in the monthly per capita HH consumption of salt, sugar | Constructed from the secondary outcome variable: | |
Fig 2Flow diagram showing participant flow through the trial.
Fig 3Participation in various stages of the intervention in the intervention arm.
Distribution of demographic characteristics in two arms at baseline.
| Characteristic | Intervention | Control |
|---|---|---|
| 25–35 | 115 (48%) | 121 (51%) |
| 36–45 | 124 (52%) | 118 (49%) |
| Male | 98 (41%) | 96 (40%) |
| Female | 141 (59%) | 143 (60%) |
| Unmarried | 26 (11%) | 24 (10%) |
| Married | 203 (85%) | 207 (87%) |
| Divorced, separated or widowed | 10 (4%) | 8 (3%) |
| ≤ 10 years of formal education | 97 (41%) | 82 (34%) |
| > 10 years of formal education | 142 (59%) | 157 (66%) |
| No paid employment | 34 (14%) | 26 (11%) |
| Paid employment (irregular) | 161 (66%) | 147 (61%) |
| Paid employment (regular) | 44 (18%) | 66 (28%) |
| ≤ 4 members | 150 (63%) | 131 (55%) |
| > 4 members | 89 (37%) | 108 (45%) |
| Low-middle expenditure group | 128 (54%) | 111 (46%) |
| High-middle expenditure group | 111 (46%) | 128 (54%) |
| No NCDs in the household members | 112 (47%) | 133 (56%) |
| At least one HH member has NCD | 127 (53%) | 106 (44%) |
| No | 114 (48%) | 101 (42%) |
| Yes | 125 (52%) | 138 (58%) |
| No | 142 (59%) | 148 (62%) |
| Yes | 97 (41%) | 91 (38%) |
† Variables related to selected individual in the household.
‡ Monthly per capita household expenditure was the proxy for socio-economic status. High- and low- middle expenditure groups were divided by the median value (INR. 1417).
§ NCDs considered for the variable are diabetes, hypertension, hypercholesterolemia on medication, cancer or heart disease.
Abbreviations: NCD: non-communicable diseases.
Mean (SEM) for baseline, end-line & percent change in outcome variables: Results of the intention-to-treat analysis.
| Outcome variable | Intervention (n = 239) | Control (n = 239) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline | End-line | %Change | Baseline | End-line | %Change | p-value | |
| Fruit intake in servings | 0.21 | 0.30 | +12.46 | 0.22 | 0.24 | +6.62 | 0.137 |
| (0.04) | (0.04) | (3.13) | (0.02) | (0.03) | (2.27) | ||
| Vegetable intake in servings | 1.83 | 1.86 | +13.99 | 1.76 | 1.80 | +13.66 | 0.967 |
| (0.10) | (0.11) | (5.45) | (0.12) | (0.11) | (6.02) | ||
| Fruit procurement in kg | 1.58 | 1.56 | +12.27 | 1.17 | 1.08 | +5.30 | 0.324 |
| (0.11) | (0.12) | (5.36) | (0.08) | (0.08) | (4.49) | ||
| Vegetable procurement kg | 1.30 | 1.24 | +10.19 | 1.06 | 0.66 | -8.97 | 0.008 |
| (0.09) | (0.09) | (5.24) | (0.08) | (0.07) | (4.33) | ||
| Salt consumption in grams | 303 | 167 | -34.37 | 246 | 252 | +11.15 | <0.001 |
| (16) | (10) | (5.39) | (8) | (11) | (5.66) | ||
| Sugar consumption in grams | 727 | 494 | -17.95 | 618 | 653 | +21.94 | <0.001 |
| (37) | (24) | (3.89) | (30) | (40) | (7.80) | ||
| Oil consumption in grams | 464 | 356 | -11.98 | 440 | 519 | +35.51 | <0.001 |
| (22) | (21) | (3.19) | (20) | (20) | (7.29) | ||
‡ The per cent change from baseline (% Change) was estimated as the difference between end-line and baseline values as a percentage of the baseline value [(end-line–baseline/ baseline) x100].
† Even though the mean values at end-line may be lower than mean values at baseline, the overall % Change for the whole arm may be positive (or vice versa); since it is the mean of the %Change for individual households; as is the case for fruit and vegetable procurement.
§ p-values for difference of the difference (i.e. difference in %change between the intervention and control arms) were based on the coefficient of linear regression for weighted samples adjusted for cluster design effect.
* p<0.05.
Abbreviation: SEM–Standard error of mean.
Proportion of households showing change in behavioral outcomes.
| Behavioral outcome | Intervention | Control | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| No | 168 (70%) | 181 (76%) | |
| Yes | 71 (30%) | 58 (24%) | 0.249 |
| No | 197 (82%) | 196 (82%) | |
| Yes | 42 (18%) | 43 (18%) | 0.726 |
| No | 159 (67%) | 164 (69%) | |
| Yes | 80 (33%) | 75 (31%) | 0.807 |
| No | 158 (66%) | 199 (83%) | |
| Yes | 81 (34%) | 40 (17%) | 0.017 |
| No | 51 (21%) | 167 (70%) | |
| Yes | 188 (79%) | 72 (30%) | <0.001 |
| No | 92 (38%) | 152 (64%) | |
| Yes | 147 (62%) | 87 (36%) | 0.0002 |
| No | 113 (47%) | 171 (72%) | |
| Yes | 126 (53%) | 68 (28%) | <0.001 |
| No | 158 (66%) | 197 (82%) | |
| Yes | 81 (34%) | 42 (18%) | 0.026 |
| No | 155 (65%) | 219 (92%) | |
| Yes | 84 (35%) | 20 (8%) | <0.001 |
* All p-values are based on weighted samples using chi-square test taking into account cluster design.
† All variables are defined in Table 3 (Part B).
Abbreviations: FV–fruit and vegetable; SSO–salt, sugar and oil.