Barriers and facilitators to implementation of menu labelling interventions to support healthy food choices: a mixed methods systematic review protocol

The use of private regulatory measures to create healthy food retail environments: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

Different forms of public and private regulation have been used to improve the healthiness of food retail environments. The aim of this scoping review was to systematically examine the types of private regulatory measures used to create healthy food retail environments, the reporting of the processes of implementation, monitoring, review and enforcement and the barriers to and enablers of these.

DESIGN

Scoping review using the Johanna Briggs Institute guidelines. Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, CINAHL Plus, Business Source Complete and Scopus databases were searched in October 2020 and again in September 2023 using terms for 'food retail', 'regulation' and 'nutrition'. Regulatory measure type was described by domain and mechanism. Deductive thematic analysis was used to identify reported barriers and enablers to effective regulatory governance processes using a public health law framework.

SETTING

Food retail.

PARTICIPANTS

Food retail settings using private regulatory measures to create healthier food retail environments.

RESULTS

In total, 17 694 articles were screened and thirty-five included for review from six countries, with all articles published since 2011. Articles reporting on twenty-six unique private regulatory measures cited a mix of voluntary (n 16), mandatory (n 6) measures, both (n 2) or did not disclose (n 2). Articles frequently reported on implementation (34/35), with less reporting on the other regulatory governance processes of monitoring (15/35), review (6/35) and enforcement (2/35).

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend more attention be paid to reporting on the monitoring, review and enforcement processes used in private regulation to promote further progress in improving the healthiness of food retail environments.

Qualitative menu labelling in university restaurants and its influence on food choices: A systematic review and synthesis without meta-analysis

Qualitative menu labelling can be defined as descriptive or non-numerical interpretive labels (e.g. traffic light labelling, healthy food symbols, messages or ingredient lists). Qualitative information seems to have a positive influence on consumers' food choices, particularly in institutional food service establishments, such as in universities. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the influence of different formats of qualitative menu labelling on food choices in university restaurants. This systematic review was guided by the Preferred Reported Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Synthesis Without Meta-Analysis (SWiM) and conducted vote counting of studies based on the direction of effect. Studies were retrieved from Cochrane Library, Scopus, MEDLINE, LILACS, SciELO and Web of Science databases and reference lists of selected articles. Experimental and quasi-experimental studies were included. Two independent researchers searched and extracted the data and assessed the methodological quality using the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. From the initial search (460 records), four papers were selected, plus one paper identified in a previous study and a further six from an update search, totalling 11 included studies, reporting 14 different interventions (n = 499 174). Types of interventions included the use of symbols and the inclusion of traffic light labelling. Outcomes of interest were food choice, expressed as mean, median or percent healthy food choices or purchases. Qualitative menu labels increased healthy food choices and/or purchase behaviour, with 10 of 12 interventions favouring the intervention (83%; 95%CI 55-95%; p = 0.0386). Most of the studies favouring the intervention used healthy food symbols for healthier foods or food components, alone or in association with another intervention and were of moderate and weak quality. These findings may serve as a basis for the implementation of nutrition information policies in university restaurants.

Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of nutrition standards for school food: a mixed-methods systematic review protocol

Background: The importance of nutrition during childhood and the high prevalence of child and adolescent obesity has resulted in several countries implementing nutritional standards for school food as a way of providing healthy school food environments. Yet, there has been less focus on the barriers and facilitators influencing the process of implementing school food standards. This mixed-methods systematic review aims to address this evidence gap by synthesising the empirical evidence on the factors that may influence the implementation of school food standards. Methods: This mixed-methods systematic review will use qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods evidence from peer-reviewed publications retrieved from the following databases; PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, EMBASE, Medline, PsycINFO and Web of Science. Grey literature will be accessed through Google Scholar, Open Access Theses and Dissertations, OpenGrey, RIAN, EThOS, ProQuest, WorldCat, Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations, and public health organisation websites will also be accessed. Screening reference lists and citation chaining of all included studies will also be undertaken. No restrictions on publication date or language will be applied, however, only primary research studies relevant to supply-side stakeholders will be eligible for inclusion. Study quality will be assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Study titles and abstracts will be screened to decide whether the full-text manuscript should be retrieved. For screening reliability, a second review author will assess a random sample of 20%. Kappa statistics will be used to assess inter-rater reliability, with values of 0.75 and higher representing high agreement. Two authors will independently extract data and factors reported to influence implementation. This will be synthesized using the Theoretical Domains Framework. Discussion: A comprehensive understanding of these factors can provide guidance to relevant stakeholders to enhance the adoption, implementation and sustainability of nutrition standards for school meals. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42019117904.

Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of nutrition standards for school food: a mixed-methods systematic review protocol

Background: The importance of nutrition during childhood and the high prevalence of child and adolescent obesity has resulted in several countries implementing nutritional standards for school food as a way of providing healthy school food environments. Yet, there has been less focus on the barriers and facilitators influencing the process of implementing school food standards. This mixed-methods systematic review aims to address this evidence gap by synthesising the empirical evidence on the factors that may influence the implementation of school food standards.

Methods: This mixed-methods systematic review will use qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods evidence from peer-reviewed publications retrieved from the following databases; PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, EMBASE, Medline, PsycINFO and Web of Science. Grey literature will be accessed through Google Scholar, Open Access Theses and Dissertations, OpenGrey, RIAN, EThOS, ProQuest, WorldCat, Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations, and public health organisation websites will also be accessed. Screening reference lists and citation chaining of all included studies will also be undertaken. No restrictions on publication date or language will be applied, however, only primary research studies relevant to supply-side stakeholders will be eligible for inclusion. Study quality will be assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Study titles and abstracts will be screened to decide whether the full-text manuscript should be retrieved. For screening reliability, a second review author will assess a random sample of 20%. Kappa statistics will be used to assess inter-rater reliability, with values of 0.75 and higher representing high agreement. Two authors will independently extract data and factors reported to influence implementation. This will be synthesized using the Theoretical Domains Framework.

Discussion: A comprehensive understanding of these factors can provide guidance to relevant stakeholders to enhance the adoption, implementation and sustainability of nutrition standards for school meals.

Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42019117904

Interventions to Promote Healthy Meals in Full-Service Restaurants and Canteens: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Out-of-home eating is increasing, but evidence about its healthiness is limited. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to elucidate the effectiveness of full-service restaurant and canteen-based interventions in increasing the dietary intake, food availability, and food purchase of healthy meals. Studies from 2000-2020 were searched in Medline, Scopus, and Cochrane Library using the PRISMA checklist. A total of 35 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 6 non-RCTs were included in the systematic review and analyzed by outcome, intervention strategies, and settings (school, community, workplace). The meta-analysis included 16 RCTs (excluding non-RCTs for higher quality). For dietary intake, the included RCTs increased healthy foods (+0.20 servings/day; 0.12 to 0.29; p < 0.001) and decreased fat intake (-9.90 g/day; -12.61 to -7.19; p < 0.001), favoring the intervention group. For food availability, intervention schools reduced the risk of offering unhealthy menu items by 47% (RR 0.53; 0.34 to 0.85; p = 0.008). For food purchases, a systematic review showed that interventions could be partially effective in improving healthy foods. Lastly, restaurant- and canteen-based interventions improved the dietary intake of healthy foods, reduced fat intake, and increased the availability of healthy menus, mainly in schools. Higher-quality RCTs are needed to strengthen the results. Moreover, from our results, intervention strategy recommendations are provided.

Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of nutrition standards for school food: a mixed methods systematic review protocol

Background: The importance of nutrition during childhood and the high prevalence of child and adolescence obesity has resulted in several countries implementing nutritional standards for school food as a way of providing healthy school food environments. Yet there has been less focus on the barriers and facilitators influencing the process of implementing school food standards. This mixed methods systematic review aims to address this evidence gap by synthesising the empirical evidence on the factors that may influence implementation of school food standards. Methods: This mixed methods systematic review will use qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods evidence from peer reviewed publications retrieved from the following databases; PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, EMBASE, Medline, PsycINFO and Web of Science. Grey literature will be accessed through Google Scholar, Open Access Theses and Dissertations, OpenGrey, RIAN, EThOS, ProQuest, WorldCat, Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations, and public health organisation websites will also be accessed. Screening reference lists and citation chaining of all included studies will also be undertaken. No restrictions on publication date or language will be applied, however, only primary research studies relevant to supply-side stakeholders will be eligible for inclusion. Study quality will be assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Study titles and abstracts will be screened to decide whether the full text manuscript should be retrieved. For screening reliability, a second review author will assess a random sample of 20%. Kappa statistics will be used to assess inter-rater reliability, with values of 0.75 and higher representing high agreement. Two authors will independently extract data and factors reported to influence implementation. This will be synthesized using the Theoretical Domains Framework. Discussion: A comprehensive understanding of these factors can provide guidance to relevant stakeholders to enhance the adaption, implementation and sustainability of nutrition standards for school meals. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42019117904

A systematic review of the factors - barriers and enablers - affecting the implementation of clinical commissioning policy to reduce health inequalities in the National Health Service (NHS), UK

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study is two-fold. First, it attempts to identify the barriers and enablers of implementing clinical commissioning policy. Second, it synthesises how these barriers and enablers affect the success of National Health Service (NHS) efforts to reduce health inequalities in the UK.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted. We searched large biomedical bibliographic databases, namely MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Allied & Complementary Medicine, DH-DATA, Global Health and CINAHL for primary studies, conducted in the UK, that assessed the factors - barriers and enablers related to health inequalities, published from 2010 onwards and in English, and reported in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. We used Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal and Mixed Methods Appraisal tools to assess the methodological qualities, and synthesised by performing thematic analysis. Two reviewers independently screened the articles and extracted data.

RESULTS

We included six primary studies (including a total of 1155 participants) in the final review. The studies reported two broad categories, under four separate themes: (1) the agenda of health inequalities has not been given priority; (2) there was very little evidence for reducing health inequalities through the clinical commissioning (CC) process; (3) CC was positively associated with the restructuring of NHS; and (4) CC brings better collaboration and engagement, which led to some improvements in health services access, utilisation and delivery at the local level.

CONCLUSION

This study provides useful factors - barriers and enablers - to implement and deliver clinical commissioning policy in improving health and well-being. These factors could be assessed in future to develop objective measures and interventions to establish the link between commissioning and health inequalities.

Implementation of e-mental health interventions for informal caregivers of adults with chronic diseases: a protocol for a mixed-methods systematic review with a qualitative comparative analysis

INTRODUCTION

Informal caregivers provide the majority of care to individuals with chronic health conditions, benefiting the care recipient and reducing use of formal care services. However, providing informal care negatively impacts the mental health of many caregivers. E-mental health interventions have emerged as a way to provide accessible mental healthcare to caregivers. Much attention has been given to reviewing the effectiveness and efficacy of such interventions, however, factors related to implementation have received less consideration. Therefore, this mixed-methods systematic review will aim to examine factors associated with the effectiveness and implementation of e-mental health interventions for caregivers.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Eligible studies published since 1 January 2007 will be searched for in several electronic databases (CINAHL Plus with Full Text, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PsycINFO, PubMed and Web of Science), clinical trial registries and OpenGrey, with all screening steps conducted by two independent reviewers. Studies will be included if they focus on the implementation or effectiveness of e-mental health interventions designed for informal adult caregivers of adults with cancer, heart disease, stroke, diabetes, dementia or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Pragmatic randomised controlled trials quantitatively reporting on caregiver anxiety, depression, psychological distress or stress will be used for a qualitative comparative analysis to identify combinations of conditions that result in effective interventions. Qualitative and quantitative data on implementation of e-mental health interventions for caregivers will be integrated in a thematic synthesis to identify barriers and facilitators to implementation. These results will inform future development and implementation planning of e-mental health interventions for caregivers.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval is not required for this study as no primary data will be collected. Results will be disseminated in the form of a scientific publication and presentations at academic conferences and plain language summaries for various stakeholders.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020155727.

Barriers and facilitators to implementation of menu labelling interventions from a food service industry perspective: a mixed methods systematic review

Background

Eating outside the home contributes to poor dietary habits worldwide and is associated with increased body fat and weight gain. Evidence shows menu labelling is effective in promoting healthier food choices; however, implementation issues have arisen. The purpose of this systematic review was to synthesise the evidence on the perceived barriers and facilitators to implementation of menu labelling interventions from the perspective of the food service industry.

Methods

Peer-reviewed and grey literature were searched using databases, specialised search engines and public health organisation websites. Screening reference lists, citation chaining and contacting authors of all included studies were undertaken. Primary research studies relevant to direct supply-side stakeholders were eligible for inclusion. There were no restrictions on menu labelling scheme or format, study methods, publication year or language. At least two independent reviewers performed study selection, data extraction and quality appraisal. The results were synthesised using the ‘best fit’ framework synthesis approach, with reference to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

Results

Seventeen studies met the eligibility criteria, with the majority rated as average quality (n = 10). The most frequently cited barriers were coded to the CFIR constructs ‘Consumer Needs & Resources’ (e.g. lack of customer demand for/interest in menu labelling, risk of overwhelmed/confused customers) and ‘Compatibility’ with organisation work processes (e.g. lack of standardised recipes, limited space on menus). Frequently cited facilitators were coded to the CFIR constructs ‘Relative Advantage’ of menu labelling (e.g. improved business image/reputation) and ‘Consumer Needs & Resources’ (e.g. customer demand for/interest in menu labelling, providing nutrition information to customers). An adapted framework consisting of a priori and new constructs was developed, which illustrates the relationships between domains.

Conclusion

This review generates an adapted CFIR framework for understanding implementation of menu labelling interventions. It highlights that implementation is influenced by multiple interdependent factors, particularly related to the external and internal context of food businesses, and features of the menu labelling intervention. The findings can be used by researchers and practitioners to develop or select strategies to address barriers that impede implementation and to leverage facilitators that assist with implementation effort.

Trial registration

Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42017083306.