The Salt Swap intervention to reduce salt intake in people with high blood pressure: protocol for a feasibility randomised controlled trial

Consolidated guidance for behavioral intervention pilot and feasibility studies

BACKGROUND

In the behavioral sciences, conducting pilot and/or feasibility studies (PFS) is a key step that provides essential information used to inform the design, conduct, and implementation of a larger-scale trial. There are more than 160 published guidelines, reporting checklists, frameworks, and recommendations related to PFS. All of these publications offer some form of guidance on PFS, but many focus on one or a few topics. This makes it difficult for researchers wanting to gain a broader understanding of all the relevant and important aspects of PFS and requires them to seek out multiple sources of information, which increases the risk of missing key considerations to incorporate into their PFS. The purpose of this study was to develop a consolidated set of considerations for the design, conduct, implementation, and reporting of PFS for interventions conducted in the behavioral sciences.

METHODS

To develop this consolidation, we undertook a review of the published guidance on PFS in combination with expert consensus (via a Delphi study) from the authors who wrote such guidance to inform the identified considerations. A total of 161 PFS-related guidelines, checklists, frameworks, and recommendations were identified via a review of recently published behavioral intervention PFS and backward/forward citation tracking of a well-known PFS literature (e.g., CONSORT Ext. for PFS). Authors of all 161 PFS publications were invited to complete a three-round Delphi survey, which was used to guide the creation of a consolidated list of considerations to guide the design, conduct, and reporting of PFS conducted by researchers in the behavioral sciences.

RESULTS

A total of 496 authors were invited to take part in the three-round Delphi survey (round 1, N = 46; round 2, N = 24; round 3, N = 22). A set of twenty considerations, broadly categorized into six themes (intervention design, study design, conduct of trial, implementation of intervention, statistical analysis, and reporting) were generated from a review of the 161 PFS-related publications as well as a synthesis of feedback from the three-round Delphi process. These 20 considerations are presented alongside a supporting narrative for each consideration as well as a crosswalk of all 161 publications aligned with each consideration for further reading.

CONCLUSION

We leveraged expert opinion from researchers who have published PFS-related guidelines, checklists, frameworks, and recommendations on a wide range of topics and distilled this knowledge into a valuable and universal resource for researchers conducting PFS. Researchers may use these considerations alongside the previously published literature to guide decisions about all aspects of PFS, with the hope of creating and disseminating interventions with broad public health impact.

A Behaviorally Informed Mobile App to Improve the Nutritional Quality of Grocery Shopping (SwapSHOP): Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Interventions targeting the nutritional quality of grocery shopping have the potential to help improve diet and health outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to assess the feasibility and acceptability of receiving advice on healthier food purchases through SwapSHOP, a behaviorally informed smartphone app that allows users to scan barcodes of grocery products from the United Kingdom, providing nutritional information and personalized swap suggestions to encourage healthier purchases.

METHODS

We randomized adult volunteers in a 6-arm parallel-group controlled feasibility trial. Participants used the SwapSHOP app to record their grocery shopping during a 2-week run-in period and were individually randomized in a 3:1 ratio to either intervention or control arms within 3 strata related to a nutrient of concern of their choice: saturated fat (SFA), sugar, or salt. Participants randomized to the intervention received the SwapSHOP app with a healthier swap function, goal setting, and personalized feedback. Participants in the control group were instructed to use a simpler version of the app to log all their food purchases without receiving any guidance or advice. The primary outcome was the feasibility of progression to a full trial, including app use and follow-up rates at 6 weeks. The secondary outcomes included other feasibility outcomes, process and qualitative measures, and exploratory effectiveness outcomes to assess changes in the nutrient content of the purchased foods.

RESULTS

A total of 112 participants were randomized into 3 groups: SFA (n=38 intervention and n=13 control), sugar (n=40 intervention and n=15 control), and salt (n=5 intervention and n=1 control, not analyzed). The 2 progression criteria were met for SFA and sugar: 81% (30/37) and 87% (34/39) of intervention participants in the SFA and sugar groups, respectively, used the app to obtain healthier swaps, and 89% (68/76) of intervention participants and 96% (23/24) of control participants completed follow-up by scanning all purchases over the follow-up period. The process and qualitative outcomes suggested that the intervention was acceptable and has the potential to influence shopping behaviors. There were reductions of -0.56 g per 100 g (95% CI -1.02 to -0.19) in SFA and -1 g per 100 g (95% CI -1.97 to -0.03) in total sugars across all food purchases in the intervention groups.

CONCLUSIONS

People were willing to use the SwapSHOP app to help reduce sugar and SFA (but not salt) in their grocery shopping. Adherence and follow-up rates suggest that a full trial is feasible. Given the suggestive evidence indicating that the intervention resulted in reductions in sugars and SFA, a definitive trial is necessary to target improvements in health outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number ISRCTN13022312; https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN13022312.

Expert Perspectives on Pilot and Feasibility Studies: A Delphi Study and Consolidation of Considerations for Behavioral Interventions

Background

In the behavioral sciences, conducting pilot and/or feasibility studies (PFS) is a key step that provides essential information used to inform the design, conduct, and implementation of a larger-scale trial. There are more than 160 published guidelines, reporting checklists, frameworks, and recommendations related to PFS. All of these publications offer some form of guidance on PFS, but many focus on one or a few topics. This makes it difficult for researchers wanting to gain a broader understanding of all the relevant and important aspects of PFS and requires them to seek out multiple sources of information, which increases the risk of missing key considerations to incorporate into their PFS. The purpose of this study was to develop a consolidated set of considerations for the design, conduct, implementation, and reporting of PFS for interventions conducted in the behavioral sciences.

Methods

To develop this consolidation, we undertook a review of the published guidance on PFS in combination with expert consensus (via a Delphi study) from the authors who wrote such guidance to inform the identified considerations. A total of 161 PFS-related guidelines, checklists, frameworks, and recommendations were identified via a review of recently published behavioral intervention PFS and backward/forward citation tracking of well-know PFS literature (e.g., CONSORT Ext. for PFS). Authors of all 161 PFS publications were invited to complete a three-round Delphi survey, which was used to guide the creation of a consolidated list of considerations to guide the design, conduct, and reporting of PFS conducted by researchers in the behavioral sciences.

Results

A total of 496 authors were invited to take part in the Delphi survey, 50 (10.1%) of which completed all three rounds, representing 60 (37.3%) of the 161 identified PFS-related guidelines, checklists, frameworks, and recommendations. A set of twenty considerations, broadly categorized into six themes (Intervention Design, Study Design, Conduct of Trial, Implementation of Intervention, Statistical Analysis and Reporting) were generated from a review of the 161 PFS-related publications as well as a synthesis of feedback from the three-round Delphi process. These 20 considerations are presented alongside a supporting narrative for each consideration as well as a crosswalk of all 161 publications aligned with each consideration for further reading.

Conclusion

We leveraged expert opinion from researchers who have published PFS-related guidelines, checklists, frameworks, and recommendations on a wide range of topics and distilled this knowledge into a valuable and universal resource for researchers conducting PFS. Researchers may use these considerations alongside the previously published literature to guide decisions about all aspects of PFS, with the hope of creating and disseminating interventions with broad public health impact.

Using Digital Platform Approach to Reduce Salt Intake in a Sample of UAE Population: An Intervention Study

Background

Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are the leading causes of mortality globally, accounting for more deaths than all other causes combined. World Health Organization launched its initiative in 2013 to reduce the intake of salt, the number of countries that have national sodium reduction strategies reached to 89 countries in 2017. In 2020, a study conducted in UAE showed more than 65% of the population exceeded WHO recommendations for salt intake. This study aimed to measure effectiveness of using digital platform approach to deliver educational materials to facilitate salt reduction in a sample of UAE population.

Methods

A controlled parallel intervention study was conducted in 2020. A sample of 121 participants completed the study and fulfilled the inclusion criteria with female to male ratio of (0.95:1.05). Participants were distributed randomly into three groups Control group, WhatsApp group, and Electronic Brochures group. Educational materials were distributed among participants of WhatsApp and Electronic brochures groups for 6-weeks. 24-h urinary excretion for sodium, potassium and creatinine, were measured in addition to KAP questionnaire and physical activity on two occasions at baseline and endpoint after 10-weeks (6-weeks of educational intervention).

Results

Both intervention groups showed a reduction in sodium with 278 mg (p < 0.001) for WhatsApp group (n = 41) and 169 mg (p < 0.018) for Electronic brochures group (n = 41), while Control group didn't show any significant change. Moreover, the percentage of participants exceeding WHO recommendation of sodium intake was significantly reduced at the end of intervention, (p = 0.004). WhatsApp group was more efficient in the percentage of reduction of participants exceeding WHO recommendation compared with baseline, with p = 0.023. A significant reduction in the practice toward adding salt during cooking, use of table salt, adding salt before tasting the foods and use of chicken stocks for both intervention groups was noted with p < 0.05. Intervention groups showed a significant improvement (p < 0.001) in Food and Health related knowledge after 6-weeks of intervention.

Conclusion

The digital platform approach such as WhatsApp and Electronic Brochure were effective in salt reduction. This study proves that UAE population is ready to reduce salt intake with appropriate education materials and easy delivery approach.

A Mobile Health Salt Reduction Intervention for People With Hypertension: Results of a Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

A high-salt diet is a risk factor for hypertension and cardiovascular disease; therefore, reducing dietary salt intake is a key part of prevention strategies. There are few effective salt reduction interventions suitable for delivery in the primary care setting, where the majority of the management and diagnosis of hypertension occurs.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to assess the feasibility of a complex behavioral intervention to lower salt intake in people with elevated blood pressure and test the trial procedures for a randomized controlled trial to investigate the intervention's effectiveness.

METHODS

This feasibility study was an unblinded, randomized controlled trial of a mobile health intervention for salt reduction versus an advice leaflet (control). The intervention was developed using the Behavior Change Wheel and comprised individualized, brief advice from a health care professional with the use of the SaltSwap app. Participants with an elevated blood pressure recorded in the clinic were recruited through primary care practices in the United Kingdom. Primary outcomes assessed the feasibility of progression to a larger trial, including follow-up attendance, fidelity of intervention delivery, and app use. Secondary outcomes were objectively assessed using changes in salt intake (measured via 24-hour urine collection), salt content of purchased foods, and blood pressure. Qualitative outcomes were assessed using the think-aloud method, and the process outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 47 participants were randomized. All progression criteria were met: follow-up attendance (45/47, 96%), intervention fidelity (25/31, 81%), and app use (27/31, 87%). There was no evidence that the intervention significantly reduced the salt content of purchased foods, salt intake, or blood pressure; however, this feasibility study was not powered to detect changes in secondary outcomes. Process and qualitative outcomes demonstrated that the trial design was feasible and the intervention was acceptable to both individuals and practitioners and positively influenced salt intake behaviors.

CONCLUSIONS

The intervention was acceptable and feasible to deliver within primary care; the trial procedures were practicable, and there was sufficient signal of potential efficacy to change salt intake. With some improvements to the intervention app, a larger trial to assess intervention effectiveness for reducing salt intake and blood pressure is warranted.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN): 20910962; https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN20910962.

An assessment of nutrition information on front of pack labels and healthiness of foods in the United Kingdom retail market

Background

Front of pack nutrition labelling is part of United Kingdom government’s programme of activities aiming to tackle diet-related diseases. There are several front of pack labelling formats available and they differ in the information they deliver. This study assessed the frequency of usage of front of pack food labelling systems on food products in the United Kingdom grocery market. It also measured the healthiness of some foods in the online market by categorising them according to their nutrient contents.

Methods

Five hundred food products in five categories [(1) cereals and cereal products, (2) dairy products, (3) beverages, (4) packaged meats and meat products, and (5) pre-packaged fruits and vegetables] from three main United Kingdom retail websites were investigated. A simple random sampling method was used for product selection according to the categories on the retailers’ websites. The healthiness of foods was also assessed by categorising them into ‘healthier’, ‘moderately healthy’ and ‘least healthy’ based on fat, saturated fat, salt and sugar contents.

Results

The total number of label types assessed comprises 19.6% of Guideline Daily Amounts or Reference Intakes and 43.8% had a combination of Traffic Light and Reference Intakes (hybrid label). Slightly over a quarter (27.4%) of products included nutritional information in a grid or table, 3.4% of the foods had two of any of the following: Health Logo, Reference Intakes and Traffic Light labels, and 5.8% did not have any Reference Intakes, Traffic Light, Health Logo or Hybrid label. Most of the foods assessed were manufactured in the United Kingdom with only 30.8% imported from 32 countries across four continents.

Conclusions

Traffic Light and Guideline Daily Amounts were the most used front of pack labelling formats on the assessed food product. A higher number of assessed products belonged to the “moderately healthy” and “healthier” categories than the “least healthy”. The imported foods that were found in the United Kingdom retail market showed that food choices could be made from the diverse food types.