| Literature DB >> 35501553 |
Fiona H McKay1, Sheree Spiteri2, Julia Zinga3, Kineta Sulemani2, Samantha E Jacobs2, Nithi Ranjan2, Lauren Ralph2, Eliza Raeburn2, Sophie Threlfall2, Midina L Bergmeier2, Paige van der Pligt2,4.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW: Food insecurity can have a negative health impact for women during pregnancy and the postpartum period; however, there are a range of barriers to meeting nutritional guidelines during pregnancy. Food insecurity is associated with an increased risk of pregnancy complications and mental and physical health outcomes. This review aims to provide insight into programmes and interventions which have targeted food insecurity in pregnant and early postpartum women. The central research question for this review is as follows: What programmes and interventions have sought to address food insecurity among pregnant and postpartum women? A systematic search of five electronic databases including Medline, CINAHL, Global Health, Embase, and Cochrane was undertaken on August 2021. Key thematic areas searched were food insecurity, pregnancy, nutritional outcomes, and interventions or programmes. Only studies that were published since 2000 in English were considered. RECENTEntities:
Keywords: Food security; Intervention; Pregnancy; Review
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35501553 PMCID: PMC9381473 DOI: 10.1007/s13668-022-00418-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Curr Nutr Rep ISSN: 2161-3311
Key search terms used in academic literature search
| Food insecurity | Pregnancy | Nutritional interventions |
|---|---|---|
| “food insecur*” OR “food access*” OR “food afford*” OR “food poverty*” OR “food secur*” OR “food suppl” OR “food sufficien*” OR “food insufficien*” OR “food desert*” OR (hunger OR hungry) OR “food Assist*” OR “Food shortage” | pregnan* OR gestation* OR maternal OR antenatal OR postnatal OR “post natal” OR postpartum OR “post partum” OR childbirth OR “child birth” OR Prenatal OR “Pre natal” OR “Recently Delivered” OR mother* OR father* OR parent* | intervention*OR strateg* OR program* OR activit* OR (policy OR policies) OR implement* OR guideline* OR Education OR “Nutrition intervention” OR “Nutrition programmes” OR “Nutrition program*” |
*Truncation used at the end of the word in all databases to retrieve all suffix variation
Fig. 1Prisma flow diagram of systematic search
Summary of studies included in review
| Briaux et al. [ | Togo | Improve the health and nutrition of mother–child pairs through cash transfer | 1357 women who were at least 3 months pregnant and mothers of children aged 0–23 months | No significant differences between control and intervention arms at baseline in any household sociodemographic and economic characteristics | Nonblinded parallel-cluster–randomised controlled trial | Cash transfer programme | 162 villages randomised into either a control arm (community case management of childhood illnesses and acute malnutrition programme and other activities) or intervention arm (intense activities) | Household Food Insecurity Access Score (HFIAS) | Height for weight and stunting. Cash transfer had positive primary outcomes. Cash transfer positively impacted mothers’ and children consumption of animal source foods and household food insecurity, but no impact on reported child morbidity 2 weeks prior to report but did reduce financial barriers to healthcare |
| Frith et al. [ | Bangladesh | Early invitation for prenatal food supplementation programme in reducing the negative influence of food insecurity on maternal-infant interaction | A cohort of 180 mother-infant dyads | No differences at baseline for food supplementation. Average age 26 years, parity 1.5, education 6–7 years | Cohort study. Women randomly assigned start time for receiving food supplement (early ~ 9 weeks or at the usual start time ~ 20 weeks gestation) | Food supplementation | Pregnant women received and consumed supplied food supplements | 11-item, experienced-based measure including availability, access, and perceptions of food insecurity | Early invitation time to start a prenatal food supplementation programme resulted in severely food-insecure mother-infant dyads exhibiting similar quality of maternal-infant interaction as more food dyads |
| Frongillo et al. [ | Bangladesh | To determine if participation in nutrition-focused antenatal care would reduce household food insecurity | 2000 women with children aged < 6 mo and 600 pregnant women in the 2nd and 3rd trimester | Both groups similar maternal and household characteristics at baseline. Mean age of women 24 y, and most not working outside the home, average 6 y education | Cluster-randomised, nonblinded | Education | The intervention package, included components to reduce food insecurity, delivered through antenatal care and interpersonal communication, community mobilisation, and monitoring weight | Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS) | Household food insecurity was reduced in areas where the nutrition-focused antenatal care and community mobilisation intervention package was implemented |
| Heberlein et al. [ | USA | Compare the effects of group to individual antenatal care in late pregnancy and early postpartum on women’s food security and psychosocial outcomes | 248 diverse, low-income pregnant women with low obstetric risk | Both groups similar age and education, more black women in the intervention group, while more women in the control group were pregnant with their first child | Prospective cohort study to compare group vs individual prenatal care service delivery | Education | Group care participants attended 10 × 2-h education sessions. Sessions included nutrition, exercise, relaxation techniques, pregnancy symptoms and comfort measures, infant care and breastfeeding, communication, self-esteem, abuse issues, parenting, and prep for childbirth | Household Food Security Survey Module-Short Form (HFSSM) | Group participants more likely to become food-secure postpartum and to remain food-secure postpartum. Group care participants had higher maternal-infant attachment scores than intervention care in early pregnancy survey |
| Leroy et al. [ | Burundi | To assess the impact of the “Tubaramure” programme on household food consumption and security, maternal dietary diversity, and infant and young child feeding practices; the role of the food rations; and the impacts on children after the programme | 2598 pregnant women mothers of children aged < 6 months | Household head average age 34-35yrs, 38–42% no formal education; Mothers average age 28-29yrs, 49–54% no formal education | 4-arm cluster-randomised controlled repeated cross-sectional design | Food supplementation | 3 components (1) monthly household food ration for pregnant women daily until offspring was 6 months; (2) improved health services; (3) twice monthly education | Household Food Insecurity Access Score (HFIAS) and Household Hunger Score (HHS) | Proportion of food-secure households higher in the treatment compared to control arms. Impact on household energy consumption similar across treatment arms and positive effect on maternal dietary diversity and children consuming > 4 food groups |
| Metallinos et al. [ | USA | The association between the duration of WIC participation and household food security | 79,240 nulliparous pregnant women eligible for the WIC programme | Maternal Age: 22.6yrs, Race: 16.5% Black, 28.5% Hispanic, 47.9% White, 7.1% Asian, Trimester of WIC entry: 48.5% 1st tri, 40.4% 2nd tri, 11.1% 3rd tri | Longitudinal study | Food supplementation | The Special Supplemental Nutrition Programme for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) allows for supplemental foods, health care referrals and nutrition education | 4 question subscale of Household Food Security Survey Module (HFSSM) | Earlier and longer WIC participation associated with improved household food security status. An additional WIC visit reduced the odds of any household food insecurity |
| Mridha et al. [ | Bangladesh | The provision of lipid-based nutrition supplements to pregnant and lactating women would result in positive nutritional change | 4011 pregnant and post-partum women (6 months) | 1047 in the experimental group and 2964 in the 3 control groups | Cluster RCT | Food supplementation | 48 clusters received iron and folic acid and 16 clusters received lipid-based nutrition supplements | Household Food Insecurity Access Score (HFIAS) | Infants in the experimental group had higher weights and were less likely to be stunted. Household food security not reported |
| Phojanakong et al. [ | USA | The effectiveness of a trauma-informed intervention to reduce household food insecurity | 372 parents of children aged < 6 years, participating in Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and SNAP | Mean age 28 years, 94.1% female, 91.1% Black, 75% high school or more | Single-arm cohort intervention | Counselling | 16 sessions of trauma-informed programming incorporated healing-centred approaches to address previous exposures to trauma | Household Food Security Survey Module (HFSSM) | Full participation had 55% lower odds of facing HFI compared with the low/no participation group |
| Raghunathan et al. [ | India | The effect of conditional cash transfers with the Mamata scheme on the delivery and uptake of nutrition interventions and household food security | 1161 pregnant women and/or mothers with up to two live births with children aged 0–24 months | Age: > 19 years, 25.8 no education 20.4%, primary school 17.1%, socioeconomic status: wealth SES quintile: 1 (low) 12.1% — 5 (highest) 26.6% | Cohort study | Cash transfer programme | The Mamata scheme provided a partial wage compensation to pregnant and lactating mothers Direct payments were made in four instalments payable at the end of the second trimester, and at 3, 6, and 9 months after delivery, conditional on antenatal check-up, vaccination, counselling sessions and exclusive breastfeeding | Household Food Insecurity Access Score (HFIAS) | cash transfers were associated with decrease in the overall HFIAS score. Purchasing from the Public Distribution System was associated with a larger decrease in the overall food insecurity. Cash transfer was associated with increased household savings and expenditure on food, expenditure on child health, food and care, expenditure on maternal health, care, and nutrition |
| Rifayanto et al. [ | Indonesia | Effectiveness of nutrition education on knowledge and attitudes and the impact of egg and milk supplementation on nutritional status of pregnant women | 45 pregnant women in their 2nd and 3rd trimester | 18–40 years old | Cohort pre-experimental study design (one group pre-test post-test) | Education and supplementation | Nutrition education intervention three meetings with pregnant women. Nutrition education was provided through lectures and discussions. Egg and milk supplementation for pregnant women is given every day for 90 days | Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS) | Consumption of protein, vegetables and fruit increased. Nutrition knowledge after nutrition education increased. Additional food in the form of egg and milk for 90 days was effective in increasing the mid-upper arm circumference. 44% of households achieved food security |
| Sibson et al. [ | Niger | To test if starting the cash transfer 2 months earlier, (same amount of cash) would reduce the prevalence of acute malnutrition in children | 2073 pregnant and lactating women and children, aged 6–59 months | Children, aged 6–59 months living in beneficiary households | Cluster‐randomised controlled trial | Cash transfer programme | Cash transfer intervention for 4 months. Cash given to female household representatives to be used to purchase a food basket. Beneficiaries required to attend education session, women and children were screened for acute malnutrition | Household Food Insecurity Access Score (HFIAS) | Starting the cash transfer earlier and providing the same amount of cash over 6 months instead of 4, alongside 4 months supplementary feeding, temporarily increased beneficiary food security, but did not impact on children’s nutritional status at end line |
Assessment of study quality
| Briaux et al. [ | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | + |
| Frith et al. [ | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | + |
| Frongillo et al. [ | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | N | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | + |
| Heberlein et al. [ | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | + |
| Leroy et al. [ | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | + |
| Metallinos-Katsaras et al. [ | Yes | Yes | Yes | NR | NR | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | + |
| Mridha et al. [ | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Unclear | Yes | No | Unclear | Ø |
| Phojanakong et al. [ | Yes | Yes | N/A | Yes | N/A | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Ø |
| Raghunathan et al. [ | Yes | Unclear | No | N/A | N/A | N/A | Yes | Yes | Unclear | Yes | Ø |
| Rifayanto et al. [ | Yes | Unclear | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | Yes | - |
| Sibson et al. [ | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Unclear | Yes | Yes | Yes | Ø |
Quality of evidence determined by using the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Evidence Analysis Library (EAL) Quality Criteria Checklist for Primary Research; NR, not reported; no (weak); unclear (moderate); yes (strong) rating for each component; overall ratings + = positive, Ø = neutral and—= negative