Lhachimi Stefan K, Pega Frank, Heise Thomas L, Fenton Candida, Gartlehner Gerald, Griebler Ursula, Sommer Isolde, Bombana Manuela, Katikireddi Srinivasa Vittal
Research Group for Evidence-Based Public Health, Leibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology, Bremen, Germany.
Department for Health Services Research, Institute for Public Health and Nursing Research, Health Sciences Bremen, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Sep 11;9(9):CD012415. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012415.pub2.
Overweight and obesity are increasing worldwide and are considered to be a major public health issue of the 21st century. Introducing taxation of the fat content in foods is considered a potentially powerful policy tool to reduce consumption of foods high in fat or saturated fat, or both.
To assess the effects of taxation of the fat content in food on consumption of total fat and saturated fat, energy intake, overweight, obesity, and other adverse health outcomes in the general population.
We searched CENTRAL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE, Embase, and 15 other databases and trial registers on 12 September 2019. We handsearched the reference lists of all records of included studies, searched websites of international organizations and institutions (14 October 2019), and contacted review advisory group members to identify planned, ongoing, or unpublished studies (26 February 2020).
In line with Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group (EPOC) criteria, we included the following study types: randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cluster-randomized controlled trials (cRCTs), non-randomized controlled trials (nRCTs), controlled before-after (CBA) studies, and interrupted time series studies. We included studies that evaluated the effects of taxes on the fat content in foods. Such a tax could be expressed as sales, excise, or special value added tax (VAT) on the final product or an intermediary product. Eligible interventions were taxation at any level, with no restriction on the duration or the implementation level (i.e. local, regional, national, or multinational). Eligible study populations were children (zero to 17 years) and adults (18 years or older) from any country and setting. We excluded studies that focused on specific subgroups only (e.g. people receiving pharmaceutical intervention; people undergoing a surgical intervention; ill people who are overweight or obese as a side effect, such as those with thyroiditis and depression; and people with chronic illness). Primary outcomes were total fat consumption, consumption of saturated fat, energy intake through fat, energy intake through saturated fat, total energy intake, and incidence/prevalence of overweight or obesity. We did not exclude studies based on country, setting, comparison, or population.
We used standard Cochrane methods for all phases of the review. Risk of bias of the included studies was assessed using the criteria of Cochrane's 'Risk of bias' tool and the EPOC Group's guidance. Results of the review are summarized narratively and the certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. These steps were done by two review authors, independently.
We identified 23,281 records from searching electronic databases and 1173 records from other sources, leading to a total of 24,454 records. Two studies met the criteria for inclusion in the review. Both included studies investigated the effect the Danish tax on saturated fat contained in selected food items between 2011 and 2012. Both studies used an interrupted time series design. Neither included study had a parallel control group from another geographic area. The included studies investigated an unbalanced panel of approximately 2000 households in Denmark and the sales data from a specific Danish supermarket chain (1293 stores). Therefore, the included studies did not address individual participants, and no restriction regarding age, sex, and socioeconomic characteristics were defined. We judged the overall risk of bias of the two included studies as unclear. For the outcome total consumption of fat, a reduction of 41.8 grams per week per person in a household (P < 0.001) was estimated. For the consumption of saturated fat, one study reported a reduction of 4.2% from minced beef sales, a reduction of 5.8% from cream sales, and an increase of 0.5% to sour cream sales (no measures of statistical precision were reported for these estimates). These estimates are based on a restricted number of food types and derived from sales data; they do not measure individual intake. Moreover, these estimates do not account for other relevant sources of fat intake (e.g. packaged or processed food) or other food outlets (e.g. restaurants or cafeterias); hence, we judged the evidence on the effect of taxation on total fat consumption or saturated fat consumption to be very uncertain. We did not identify evidence on the effect of the intervention on energy intake or the incidence or prevalence of overweight or obesity.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Given the very low quality of the evidence currently available, we are unable to reliably establish whether a tax on total fat or saturated fat is effective or ineffective in reducing consumption of total fat or saturated fat. There is currently no evidence on the effect of a tax on total fat or saturated fat on total energy intake or energy intake through saturated fat or total fat, or preventing the incidence or reducing the prevalence of overweight or obesity.
超重和肥胖在全球范围内呈上升趋势,被视为21世纪的一个主要公共卫生问题。对食品中的脂肪含量征税被认为是一种潜在的有力政策工具,可减少高脂肪或高饱和脂肪食品(或两者兼而有之)的消费。
评估食品脂肪含量税对普通人群总脂肪和饱和脂肪消费、能量摄入、超重、肥胖及其他不良健康结局的影响。
我们于2019年9月12日检索了Cochrane系统评价中心数据库(CENTRAL)、Cochrane系统评价数据库、MEDLINE、Embase及其他15个数据库和试验注册库。我们手工检索了纳入研究的所有记录的参考文献列表,检索了国际组织和机构的网站(2019年10月14日),并联系了综述咨询小组成员以识别计划中、进行中的或未发表的研究(2020年2月26日)。
根据Cochrane有效实践与护理组织(EPOC)小组标准,我们纳入了以下研究类型:随机对照试验(RCT)、整群随机对照试验(cRCT)、非随机对照试验(nRCT)、前后对照研究(CBA)和中断时间序列研究。我们纳入了评估食品脂肪含量税影响的研究。这种税可以表示为对最终产品或中间产品征收的销售税、消费税或特别增值税(VAT)。符合条件的干预措施是任何水平的征税,对持续时间或实施水平(即地方、区域、国家或跨国)没有限制。符合条件的研究人群为来自任何国家和环境的儿童(0至17岁)和成年人(18岁及以上)。我们排除了仅关注特定亚组的研究(例如接受药物干预的人群;接受手术干预的人群;因副作用而超重或肥胖的患病者,如甲状腺炎和抑郁症患者;以及慢性病患者)。主要结局为总脂肪消费、饱和脂肪消费、通过脂肪摄入的能量、通过饱和脂肪摄入的能量、总能量摄入以及超重或肥胖的发生率/患病率。我们没有根据国家、环境、对照或人群排除研究。
我们在综述的所有阶段都采用了标准的Cochrane方法。使用Cochrane的“偏倚风险”工具标准和EPOC小组的指南评估纳入研究的偏倚风险。综述结果采用叙述性总结,证据的确定性采用GRADE方法评估。这些步骤由两位综述作者独立完成。
我们从电子数据库检索中识别出23281条记录,从其他来源识别出1173条记录,共计24454条记录。两项研究符合纳入综述的标准。两项纳入研究均调查了2011年至2012年丹麦对选定食品中饱和脂肪征税的影响。两项研究均采用中断时间序列设计。两项纳入研究均没有来自其他地理区域的平行对照组。纳入研究调查了丹麦约2000户家庭的不平衡样本以及一家丹麦特定连锁超市(1293家门店)的销售数据。因此,纳入研究未涉及个体参与者,也未对年龄、性别和社会经济特征进行限制。我们判断两项纳入研究的总体偏倚风险尚不清楚。对于总脂肪消费结局,估计每户每人每周减少41.8克(P<0.001)。对于饱和脂肪消费,一项研究报告碎牛肉销售额减少4.2%,奶油销售额减少5.8%,酸奶油销售额增加0.5%(这些估计未报告统计精度的测量值)。这些估计基于有限数量的食品类型且来源于销售数据;它们未测量个体摄入量。此外,这些估计未考虑其他相关的脂肪摄入来源(如包装或加工食品)或其他食品销售点(如餐馆或自助餐厅);因此,我们判断关于征税对总脂肪消费或饱和脂肪消费影响的证据非常不确定。我们未发现关于干预对能量摄入或超重或肥胖发生率或患病率影响的证据。
鉴于目前可用证据的质量非常低,我们无法可靠地确定对总脂肪或饱和脂肪征税在减少总脂肪或饱和脂肪消费方面是否有效或无效。目前没有证据表明对总脂肪或饱和脂肪征税对总能量摄入、通过饱和脂肪或总脂肪摄入的能量,或预防超重或肥胖的发生率或降低其患病率有影响。