| Literature DB >> 30746124 |
Marianne S Sabinsky1, Ulla Toft2, Helle M Sommer3, Inge Tetens1,4.
Abstract
Strategies are needed to improve the dietary habits of children. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of implementing a school food programme on the dietary quality of lunches consumed by school children aged 7-13 years compared with packed lunches brought from home. A secondary objective was to investigate if a possible effect would differ between the younger children and the older. A quasi-experimental study design with four intervention schools and four matched control schools was conducted. In total, 984 school children participated. Data on packed lunches were collected at baseline. At the 1st follow-up the children in the intervention schools were offered free school meals and at the 2nd follow-up children paid for their school meals. The control group had packed lunches at all measurements. A digital photographic method combined with a Meal Index of dietary Quality (Meal IQ) was used for dietary assessment. Multilevel modelling was employed for data analyses. The quality of dietary intake was improved when free school meals were offered (P = 0·004); if the school meals were paid for the use was limited and no difference in change in dietary quality was found (P = 0·343). The school food programme had no difference in effect according to age (P = 0·083). In conclusion, offering a free school meal had a positive effect on dietary quality of the lunches consumed by school children aged 7-13 years. No effect was measured when the school meals were not provided for free. The dietary effect did not depend on age.Entities:
Keywords: Dietary interventions; Environmental interventions; Meal IQ, Meal Index of dietary Quality; Multilevel analyses; Nutrition programmes; School-based interventions
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30746124 PMCID: PMC6360196 DOI: 10.1017/jns.2018.29
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Nutr Sci ISSN: 2048-6790
Fig. 1.Flow of schools, participants and meals through the study.
Fig. 2.Study design.
Characteristics and quality of dietary intake (Meal Index of dietary Quality; Meal IQ) of packed lunches in the intervention and control groups at baseline
(Mean values and standard deviations; numbers of participants; percentages of participants)
| Intervention | Control | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Characteristics | Mean | Mean | |||
| Age (years) | 9·65 | 1·65 | 9·73 | 1·59 | 0·473 |
| 446 | 438 | ||||
| Grade | 0·748 | ||||
| 2nd–3rd | 240 | 246 | |||
| 5th–6th | 242 | 238 | |||
| % 2nd–3rd | 49·8 | 50·8 | |||
| 482 | 484 | ||||
| Sex | 0·248 | ||||
| Girls | 234 | 217 | |||
| Boys | 248 | 267 | |||
| % Girls | 48·5 | 44·8 | |||
| 482 | 484 | ||||
| BMI (kg/m2) | 18·3 | 2·8 | 18·4 | 3·2 | 0·484 |
| 474 | 473 | ||||
| Social class | |||||
| I | 29 | 39 | 0·248 | ||
| II | 14 | 14 | 0·991 | ||
| III | 165 | 179 | 0·538 | ||
| IV | 177 | 167 | 0·620 | ||
| V | 37 | 29 | 0·333 | ||
| VI | 40 | 31 | 0·295 | ||
| VII | 4 | 8 | 0·254 | ||
| VIII | 0 | 1 | 0·319 | ||
| Missing information | 16 | 16 | 0·991 | ||
| Meal IQ | 11·3 | 4·8 | 11·5 | 5·1 | 0·241 |
| 1362 | 1361 | ||||
P values are based on the t test statistic; P values for comparison of proportions are based on the χ2 statistic.
Danish Occupational Social Class (DOSC) measure().
Number of meals.
Fig. 3.Comparison of changes in Meal Index of dietary Quality (Meal IQ) score between school children in intervention and control schools in 2nd–3rd grades and 5th–6th grades. T1, Baseline; T2, 1st follow up; T3, 2nd follow-up.
Significant explanatory variables from the main analysis of effects on changes in dietary quality†
(Estimates with their standard errors)
| Symbols | Effects | Estimate | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | 6·99 | 0·54 | <0·0001 | |
| Meal IQbaseline | −0·66 | 0·03 | <0·0001 | |
| + Intervention | 3·13 | 0·56 | 0·016 | |
| − Intervention (control group) | 0 | |||
| Grade (5th–6th) | −0·55 | 0·30 | <0·0001 | |
| Grade (2nd–3rd) | 0 | |||
| Time (T3) | −0·93 | 0·48 | <0·0001 | |
| Time (T2) | 0 | 0·04 | 0·026 | |
| Intervention × time (T3) (intervention group) | −2·70 | 0·28 | <0·0001 | |
| Intervention × time (T2) (intervention group) | 0 | |||
| Intervention × time (T3) (control group) | 0 | |||
| Intervention × time (T2) (control group) | 0 | 0·28 | <0·0001 |
Meal IQ, Meal Index of dietary Quality; T2, 1st follow-up; T3, 2nd follow-up.
P value for type 3 tests for fixed effects.
The effect estimates of all parameters plus their standard errors are given together with the P values (n 5333).
Components of the Meal Index of dietary Quality (Meal IQ) (unadjusted data) at baseline (T1), 1st follow-up (T2) and 2nd follow-up (T3) in the intervention and control groups
(Mean values and standard deviations)
| Baseline | 1st follow-up | 2nd follow-up | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention ( | Control ( | Intervention ( | Control ( | Intervention ( | Control ( | |||||||
| Mean | Mean | Mean | Mean | Mean | Mean | |||||||
| Total fat (units) | −0·19 | 1·26 | −0·15 | 1·14 | 0·82 | 1·03 | −0·18 | 1·14 | −0·17 | 1·17 | −0·04 | 1·03 |
| Saturated fat (units) | 1·77 | 1·38 | 1·51 | 1·29 | 0·80 | 0·99 | 1·37 | 1·26 | 1·57 | 1·32 | 1·20 | 1·25 |
| Whole grains and potatoes (units) | 0·97 | 0·83 | 0·89 | 0·86 | 0·56 | 0·87 | 0·75 | 0·78 | 0·80 | 0·81 | 0·67 | 0·77 |
| Snack products (units) | 3·39 | 1·29 | 3·32 | 1·37 | 13·64 | 0·81 | 3·22 | 1·47 | 3·28 | 1·44 | 3·05 | 1·60 |
| Fish (g) | 1·49 | 5·66 | 1·46 | 5·71 | 4·15 | 11·9 | 1·51 | 6·04 | 1·17 | 5·23 | 1·51 | 5·94 |
| Fruit (g) | 22·1 | 48·4 | 27·6 | 52·5 | 10·6 | 31·9 | 20·9 | 43·2 | 15·0 | 41·5 | 18·3 | 42·4 |
| Vegetables (g) | 28·9 | 36·5 | 29·38 | 38·0 | 46·4 | 41·7 | 24·4 | 34·0 | 24·5 | 34·0 | 22·0 | 33·1 |
| Meal IQ | 11·3 | 4·80 | 11·55 | 5·09 | 13·64 | 4·02 | 10·7 | 5·22 | 10·4 | 4·86 | 10·1 | 5·56 |