Jostock Cinja, Forde Hannah, Roberts Nia, Jebb Susan A, Pechey Rachel, Bandy Lauren
Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Bodleian Health Care Libraries, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Public Health Nutr. 2025 Jan 9;28(1):e24. doi: 10.1017/S1368980025000035.
This systematic review investigates the characteristics, effectiveness and acceptability of interventions to encourage healthier eating in small, independent restaurants and takeaways.
We searched five databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and Science Citation Index and Social Science Citation Index) in June 2022. Eligible studies had to measure changes in sales, availability, nutritional quality, portion sizes or dietary intake of interventions targeting customer behaviour or restaurant environments. We evaluated study quality using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Results are synthesised narratively, and interventions' impact on personal autonomy is assessed using the Nuffield intervention ladder.
Small, independent or local restaurants or hot food takeaway outlets, with no restrictions by year or country.
Anyone selling or purchasing food in intervention settings (e.g. restaurant staff/owners, customers).
We screened 4624 records and included 12 studies describing 13 interventions in 351 businesses. Most studies were of poor quality. Customer-level intervention components mostly operated on the lower rungs of the Nuffield ladder, and most had limited positive effects on increasing demand, measured as sales or orders of healthy options. Whilst rare, most interventions measuring business outcomes operated on higher ladder rungs and showed small positive results. There was insufficient evidence to investigate differences in impact by intervention intrusiveness. Acceptability was greater for interventions that were low-effort, inexpensive and perceived as not negatively impacting on customer satisfaction.
Despite some evidence of small positive effects of healthy eating interventions on healthier purchases or restaurant/hot food takeaway practices, a weak evidence base hinders robust inference.
本系统评价旨在调查鼓励小型独立餐馆和外卖店提供更健康饮食的干预措施的特点、有效性和可接受性。
我们于2022年6月检索了五个数据库（Cochrane系统评价数据库、医学索引数据库、荷兰医学文摘数据库、护理学与健康领域数据库以及科学引文索引和社会科学引文索引）。符合条件的研究必须测量针对顾客行为或餐馆环境的干预措施在销售额、供应情况、营养质量、份量大小或饮食摄入量方面的变化。我们使用混合方法评估工具对研究质量进行评估。结果采用叙述性综合分析，并用纳菲尔德干预阶梯评估干预措施对个人自主性的影响。
小型独立或当地餐馆或热食外卖店，不受年份或国家限制。
在干预场所销售或购买食品的任何人（如餐馆工作人员/业主、顾客）。
我们筛选了4624条记录，纳入了12项研究，这些研究描述了351家企业中的13项干预措施。大多数研究质量较差。顾客层面的干预措施大多处于纳菲尔德阶梯的较低层级，而且大多数对增加健康食品选项的需求（以销售额或订单衡量）的积极影响有限。虽然罕见，但大多数衡量企业成果的干预措施处于较高层级，并显示出较小的积极效果。没有足够的证据来调查干预措施的侵扰性对影响的差异。低投入、低成本且被认为不会对顾客满意度产生负面影响的干预措施的可接受性更高。
尽管有证据表明健康饮食干预措施对更健康的购买行为或餐馆/热食外卖行为有一些微小的积极影响，但证据基础薄弱阻碍了有力的推断。
