Department of Nutrition Science, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
Science Department, Center for Science in the Public Interest, Washington, DC.
J Acad Nutr Diet. 2022 Nov;122(11):2060-2071. doi: 10.1016/j.jand.2022.02.016. Epub 2022 Feb 26.
Voices for Food was a longitudinal community, food pantry-based intervention informed by the social ecological model, and designed to improve food security, dietary intake, and quality among clients, which was carried out in 24 rural food pantries across 6 Midwestern states.
Our objective was to evaluate changes in adult food security, dietary intake, and quality from baseline (2014) to follow-up (2016), and to assess the role of adult food security on dietary outcomes.
A multistate, longitudinal, quasi-experimental intervention with matched treatment and comparison design was used to evaluate treatment vs comparison group changes over time and changes in both groups over time.
PARTICIPANTS/SETTING: Adult food pantry clients (n = 617) completed a demographic food security survey, and up to three 24-hour dietary recalls at baseline (n = 590) and follow-up (n = 160).
Community coaching served as the experimental component, which only "treatment" communities received, and a food council guide and food pantry toolkit were provided to both "treatment" and matched "comparison" communities.
Change in adult food security status, mean usual intakes of nutrients and food groups, and Healthy Eating Index-2010 scores were the main outcome measures.
Linear mixed models estimated changes in outcomes by intervention group and by adult food security status over time.
Improvements in adult food security score (-0.7 ± 0.3; P = .01), Healthy Eating Index-2010 total score (4.2 ± 1.1; P < .0001), and empty calories component score (3.4 ± 0.5; P <.0001) from baseline to follow-up were observed in treatment and comparison groups, but no statistically significant changes were found for adult food security status, dietary quality, and usual intakes of nutrients and food groups between the 2 groups over time. The intervention effect on dietary quality and usual intake changes over time by adult food security status were also not observed.
Food pantry clients in treatment and comparison groups had higher food security and dietary quality at the follow-up evaluation of the Voices for Food intervention trial compared with baseline, despite the lack of difference among the groups as a result of the experimental coaching component.
“为食物发声”是一个基于社会生态模型的纵向社区食品储藏室干预项目，旨在改善客户的粮食安全、饮食摄入和质量，该项目在中西部 6 个州的 24 个农村食品储藏室进行。
我们的目的是评估从基线（2014 年）到随访（2016 年）期间成年人群的粮食安全、饮食摄入和质量的变化，并评估成年人群的粮食安全对饮食结果的影响。
采用多州、纵向、准实验干预研究，采用匹配的治疗和对照组设计，评估治疗组和对照组随时间的变化以及两组随时间的变化。
参与者/设置：成年食品储藏室客户（n=617）完成了人口统计学粮食安全调查，并在基线（n=590）和随访（n=160）时完成了多达三次 24 小时饮食回忆。
社区辅导是实验组成部分，只有“治疗”社区接受，同时为“治疗”和匹配的“对照”社区提供食品委员会指南和食品储藏室工具包。
成年人群粮食安全状况的变化、营养素和食物组的平均日常摄入量以及健康饮食指数-2010 评分是主要观察指标。
线性混合模型估计了干预组和成年人群粮食安全状况随时间的变化。
在治疗组和对照组中，观察到成年人群粮食安全评分（-0.7±0.3；P=0.01）、健康饮食指数-2010 总分（4.2±1.1；P <.0001）和空卡路里成分评分（3.4±0.5；P <.0001）从基线到随访均有改善，但在两组之间，成年人群粮食安全状况、饮食质量以及营养素和食物组的日常摄入量在随时间的变化上均无统计学意义。也没有观察到干预对成年人群粮食安全状况随时间变化的饮食质量和日常摄入量的影响。
尽管由于实验辅导组成部分，治疗组和对照组的食品储藏室客户在“为食物发声”干预试验的随访评估中与基线相比，粮食安全和饮食质量更高，但两组之间没有差异。
