| Literature DB >> 34857552 |
Dorota Zarnowiecki1, Shabnam Kashef1, Astrid Am Poelman2, Maeva O Cochet-Broch3, Jennifer C Arguelles4, David N Cox5, Rebecca K Golley6.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Globally, children do not eat enough core foods, with vegetable intakes persistently low. Early life is critical for establishing vegetable acceptance and intake. Increased usage of formal childcare has led to the importance of childcare settings shaping children's food intake. This study will use the multiphase optimisation strategy to develop, optimise and evaluate the effectiveness of a multicomponent initiative package to increase 2-to-5-year-old children's vegetable intake in long day care centres. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The preparation phase will use existing literature and best practice guidelines to develop three initiatives aiming to: (1) increase vegetable provision at mealtimes, (2) deliver a vegetable-focused sensory curriculum and (3) use supportive mealtime practices encouraging children's tasting of vegetables. The optimisation phase (N=32 centres) will use a 12-week, eight-condition factorial experiment to test main and synergistic effects of the initiatives. The optimum combination of initiatives producing the largest increase in vegetable intake will be identified. The evaluation phase (N=20 centres) will test the effectiveness of the optimised package using a 12-week waitlist randomised controlled trial. Primary outcomes are children's vegetable intake and food group intake at long day care. Secondary outcomes are menu guideline compliance, cook and educator knowledge and skills, and reach. Process evaluation will include fidelity, acceptability, barriers and facilitators, and compatibility with practice. Repeated measures ANOVA with interaction effects (optimisation phase) and linear mixed modelling (evaluation phase) will test effects of the initiatives on vegetable intake. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has received ethics approval from the Flinders University Research Ethics Committee (Project No: 1873) for the optimisation phase. Approval for the evaluation phase will be obtained following completion of optimisation phase. Findings will be disseminated to stakeholders, including long day care centres and childcare organisations; and to researchers via peer-reviewed journals and conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: ACTRN12620001301954, ACTRN12620001323910p. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.Entities:
Keywords: community child health; nutrition & dietetics; public health
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34857552 PMCID: PMC8640664 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-047618
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMJ Open ISSN: 2044-6055 Impact factor: 2.692
Description and alignment with best practice guidelines of initiatives to increase 2-to-5-year-old children’s vegetable intake in long day care (LDC)
| Initiative | LDC staff | Description | Initiative goals and objectives | Best practice guidelines for vegetable intake in LDC |
| Food provision | Cooks | Online cook’s training module supported by online menu assessment tool to increase vegetable provision in meals and snacks. | Goal: To support cooks to increase the provision of vegetables on the menu to align with guidelines and across all mealtimes Increase cook’s knowledge and skills to provide a menu in line with menu planning guidelines Reduce barriers to the provision of vegetables on the menu Support cooks to plan and monitor their provision of vegetables on the menu |
Make vegetables the hero—have simple vegetable specific messages with a clear focus Coordinate sustained effort across multiple players—coordinate long-term action among key players involved in promoting and proving vegetables Grow knowledge and skills to support change—identify and act on gaps in knowledge and skills Minimise barriers to increase success—understand and identify ways to address barriers Plan for and commit to success—set clear and measurable vegetable-specific goals Create an environment that supports children to eat vegetables—make vegetables the easy choice, promote vegetable familiarisation and intake Monitor and provide feedback on progress—monitor progress against goals at regular intervals |
| Mealtime environment | Educator (mealtimes) | Online educator training module supported to encourage children to taste and enjoy vegetables at mealtimes. | Goal: To increase the use of mealtime practices which will promote children’s vegetable acceptance and intake | |
| Curriculum | Educator (teaching) | Lesson plans and teaching resources aligned with The Early Years Learning Framework (51), focusing on increasing vegetable liking and intake via repeated and other sensory exposure, sensory education and experiential learning | Goal: To create an environment which supports children to enjoy, try and consume vegetables Increase children’s ability to describe their sensory perceptions when eating vegetables Increase exposure to a variety of familiar and unfamiliar vegetables Support children to enjoy vegetables and be able to taste any vegetable |
Figure 1Logic model for development of initiative package for use in long day care to increase children’s vegetable intake *Other sensory exposure—sensory-based explorative behaviours through the five senses (sight, smell, touch, hearing, taste) to promote familiarisation with vegetables.
Figure 2Study design for development and evaluation of initiative package for use in LDC to increase children’s vegetable intake *See table 2 for outcome measures and instruments at all time points. LDC long day care; LDCC, long day care centres.
Summary of evaluation data collected using the RE-AIM framework in the multiphase optimisation strategy study evaluating the effectiveness of an initiative package to increase 2-to-5-year-old children’s vegetable intake in LDC
| Outcome measures | Optimisation phase | Evaluation phase | |||||
| Time point | Instrument | Time point | Instrument | ||||
| Reach | Response rate | ✓ | – | Study records | |||
| Proportion of LDC centres in state participating | ✓ | BL | Study records, ACECQA data | ✓ | Registration questionnaire, ACECQA data | ||
| Profile of participating children (age, gender, ATSI, ethnicity) | ✓ | BL, 12 w | Centre data | ✓ | BL, 12 w | SFS-ECEC | |
| Adoption | Characteristics and representativeness of centres (type of provider, centre size, SES, location, cook and educator experience in sector, previous training) | ✓ | BL | Baseline questionnaire—cook, educator, director | ✓ | BL | Baseline questionnaire—cook, educator, director |
| Efficacy/Effectiveness—Primary outcome | Child vegetable intake in care (serves/day) | ✓ | BL, 12 w | Plate waste | ✓ | BL, 12 w | SFS-ECEC |
| Child intake of other food groups—fruit, grains, dairy, meat and alternatives, extras (serves/day) | ✓ | ||||||
| Efficacy/Effectiveness—Impact | Knowledge (educators and cooks) | ✓ | BL, 12 w | TDFQ—cook, educator, teacher (curriculum) | ✓ | BL, 12 w | TDFQ—cook, educator, teacher (curriculum) |
| Skills (self-report educators and cooks) | ✓ | ✓ | |||||
| Menu compliance with guidelines | ✓ | BL, 12 w | Menu assessment | ✓ | BL, 12 w | Website metrics | |
| Implementation—Fidelity and dose | Initiatives delivery (fidelity): | ||||||
| Initiative completion (cook’s training, menu assessment completion, educator training) | ✓ | 12 w | Website metrics | ✓ | 12 w | Website metrics | |
| Reasons for non-completion | ✓ | 12 w | Follow-up questionnaire | ||||
| Initiative implementation at centre (dose): | |||||||
| Menu implementation | ✓ | 12 w | Cook self-report in follow-up questionnaire | ✓ | 12 w | Cook self-report in follow-up questionnaire | |
| Use of feeding practices at mealtimes | ✓ | BL, 12 w | Educator TDFQ | ✓ | BL, 12 w | Educator TDFQ | |
| Curriculum delivery | ✓ | 12 w | Curriculum checklist | ✓ | 12 w | Curriculum checklist | |
| Reasons for non-implementation | ✓ | 12 w | Follow-up questionnaire | ||||
| Other: | |||||||
| Contamination and cointervention | ✓ | 12 w | Follow-up questionnaire | ✓ | 12 w | Follow-up questionnaire | |
| Completion rate | ✓ | 12 w | Study records | ✓ | – | Study records | |
| Reasons for withdrawal | ✓ | – | Study records | ||||
| Implementation—Process | Acceptability (training and resources) | ✓ | 12 w | TDFQ—cook, educator, teacher (curriculum) | ✓ | 12 w | TDFQ – cook, educator, teacher (curriculum) |
| Contextual factors influencing implementation (barriers and facilitators, beliefs about benefits and disadvantages, social influences) | ✓ | 12 w | |||||
| Self-efficacy (educators and cooks) | ✓ | 12 w | |||||
| Feasibility | ✓ | – | Interpretation of implementation and maintenance | ✓ | – | Interpretation of implementation and maintenance | |
| Maintenance (sustainability) | Compatibility with practice (part of regular practice, professional role to implement, intention to implement) | ✓ | 12 w | TDFQ—cook, educator, teacher (curriculum) | ✓ | 12 w | TDFQ—cook, educator, teacher (curriculum) |
ACECQA, Australian Children’s Education & Care Quality Authority; ATSI, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander; BL, baseline; LDC, Long Day Care; m, month; RE-AIM, Reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation and maintenance framework; SA, South Australia; SFS-ECEC, Short Food Survey – Early Care and Education; TDFQ, Theoretical Domains Framework Questionnaire; VIC, Victoria; w, week.