Department of Health Sciences and the EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J Hum Nutr Diet. 2012 Apr;25(2):180-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-277X.2011.01219.x. Epub 2011 Dec 3.
In a previous study, the effectiveness of introducing a small meal in addition to the existing size and a proportional pricing strategy have been assessed in Dutch worksite cafeterias. To assess the degree of implementation and to inform the design of future interventions, the present study aimed to describe the process evaluation of both interventions.
Process evaluation components from Baranowski and Stables, and Rogers (i.e. Recruitment, Maintenance, Context, Resources, Implementation, Exposure, Contamination, and Continued use) were chosen as a theoretical basis. The process evaluation involved qualitative (e.g. structured observations, semi-structured interviews) and quantitative data (e.g. consumer questionnaires) collected from 17 intervention and eight control worksite cafeterias.
In all intervention cafeterias, two portion sizes were offered. The pricing instructions were followed in 13 intervention cafeterias. The cafeterias managers indicated that they did not consider offering large and small meals as being complex, risky or time-consuming to implement. Some managers perceived the consumer demand as high, others as (too) low. One year after the study had ended, nine of the intervention cafeterias had continued (at least partly) to follow the protocol.
Offering a smaller portion size in addition to the existing size, as well as proportional pricing, was generally implemented as prescribed by the protocol and can be considered promising in terms of continued use. However, additional efforts are needed to make the intervention more effective in motivating consumers to replace their large portion with a small portion.
在之前的一项研究中，评估了在荷兰工作场所自助餐厅中引入小份餐以及采用现行份量和比例定价策略的效果。为了评估实施程度并为未来干预措施的设计提供信息，本研究旨在描述这两种干预措施的过程评估。
选择 Baranowski 和 Stables 以及 Rogers 的过程评估要素（即招募、维持、背景、资源、实施、暴露、污染和持续使用）作为理论基础。过程评估涉及从 17 家干预工作场所自助餐厅和 8 家对照工作场所自助餐厅收集的定性（例如，结构化观察、半结构化访谈）和定量数据（例如，消费者调查问卷）。
在所有干预自助餐厅中，都提供了两种份量。在 13 家干预自助餐厅中遵循了定价说明。自助餐厅经理表示，他们认为提供大份和小份餐并不复杂、有风险或耗时。一些经理认为消费者需求高，而另一些则认为（太低）。研究结束一年后，有 9 家干预自助餐厅继续（至少部分）遵循该方案。
除了现有的份量外，提供较小的份量以及采用比例定价，总体上按照方案进行了实施，并且可以考虑在持续使用方面具有前景。然而，需要进一步努力使干预措施更有效地激励消费者用小份量替代大份量。
