1
|
Michalopoulou S, Sifaki M, Packer J, Lanigan J, Stansfield C, Viner RM, Russell S. Assessing the impact of obesity interventions in the early years: a systematic review of UK-based studies. BMJ Open 2024; 14:e076479. [PMID: 38740507 PMCID: PMC11097867 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-076479] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/08/2023] [Accepted: 02/13/2024] [Indexed: 05/16/2024] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Childhood obesity rates in the UK are high. The early years of childhood are critical for establishing healthy behaviours and offer interventional opportunities. We aimed to identify studies evaluating the impact of UK-based obesity interventions in early childhood. DESIGN Systematic review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. DATA SOURCES Nine databases were searched in March 2023. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA We included UK-based obesity intervention studies delivered to children aged 6 months to 5 years that had diet and/or physical activity components and reported anthropometric outcomes. The primary outcome of interest was z-score Body Mass Index (zBMI) change (within and between subjects). Studies evaluating the effects of breastfeeding interventions were not included as obesity prevention interventions, given that best-practice formula feeding is also likely to encourage healthy growth. The publication date for studies was limited to the previous 12 years (2011-23), as earlier reviews found few evaluations of interventions in the UK. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS The reviewers worked independently using standardised approach to search, screen and code the included studies. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane tools (ROB 2 or ROBINS-I). RESULTS Six trials (five studies) were identified, including two randomised controlled trials (RCT), one cluster randomised trial (CRT), two feasibility CRTs and one impact assessment. The total number of participants was 566. Three trials focused on disadvantaged families and two included high-risk children categorised as having overweight or obesity. Compared with baseline, five interventions reported reductions in zBMI, three of which were statistically significant (p<0.05). Compared with control, five interventions showed zBMI reductions, one of which was significant. Only two trials were followed up beyond 12 months. All studies were found to have a high risk of bias. Meta-analysis was not possible due to the heterogeneity of studies. CONCLUSION UK evidence was limited but some interventions showed promising results in promoting healthy growth. As part of a programme of policies, interventions in the early years may have an important role in reducing the risk of childhood obesity. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER CRD42021290676.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Semina Michalopoulou
- Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Maria Sifaki
- Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, University College London, London, UK
| | - Jessica Packer
- Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Julie Lanigan
- Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, UK
| | | | - Russell M Viner
- Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Simon Russell
- Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Yoong SL, Lum M, Wolfenden L, Jackson J, Barnes C, Hall AE, McCrabb S, Pearson N, Lane C, Jones JZ, Nolan E, Dinour L, McDonnell T, Booth D, Grady A. Healthy eating interventions delivered in early childhood education and care settings for improving the diet of children aged six months to six years. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2023; 8:CD013862. [PMID: 37606067 PMCID: PMC10443896 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd013862.pub3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/23/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Dietary intake during early childhood can have implications on child health and developmental trajectories. Early childhood education and care (ECEC) services are recommended settings to deliver healthy eating interventions as they provide access to many children during this important period. Healthy eating interventions delivered in ECEC settings can include strategies targeting the curriculum (e.g. nutrition education), ethos and environment (e.g. menu modification) and partnerships (e.g. workshops for families). Despite guidelines supporting the delivery of healthy eating interventions in this setting, little is known about their impact on child health. OBJECTIVES To assess the effectiveness of healthy eating interventions delivered in ECEC settings for improving dietary intake in children aged six months to six years, relative to usual care, no intervention or an alternative, non-dietary intervention. Secondary objectives were to assess the impact of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions on physical outcomes (e.g. child body mass index (BMI), weight, waist circumference), language and cognitive outcomes, social/emotional and quality-of-life outcomes. We also report on cost and adverse consequences of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions. SEARCH METHODS We searched eight electronic databases including CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ERIC, Scopus and SportDiscus on 24 February 2022. We searched reference lists of included studies, reference lists of relevant systematic reviews, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov and Google Scholar, and contacted authors of relevant papers. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including cluster-RCTs, stepped-wedge RCTs, factorial RCTs, multiple baseline RCTs and randomised cross-over trials, of healthy eating interventions targeting children aged six months to six years that were conducted within the ECEC setting. ECEC settings included preschools, nurseries, kindergartens, long day care and family day care. To be included, studies had to include at least one intervention component targeting child diet within the ECEC setting and measure child dietary or physical outcomes, or both. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Pairs of review authors independently screened titles and abstracts and extracted study data. We assessed risk of bias for all studies against 12 criteria within RoB 1, which allows for consideration of how selection, performance, attrition, publication and reporting biases impact outcomes. We resolved discrepancies via consensus or by consulting a third review author. Where we identified studies with suitable data and homogeneity, we performed meta-analyses using a random-effects model; otherwise, we described findings using vote-counting approaches and via harvest plots. For measures with similar metrics, we calculated mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes. We calculated standardised mean differences (SMDs) for primary and secondary outcomes where studies used different measures. We applied GRADE to assess certainty of evidence for dietary, cost and adverse outcomes. MAIN RESULTS We included 52 studies that investigated 58 interventions (described across 96 articles). All studies were cluster-RCTs. Twenty-nine studies were large (≥ 400 participants) and 23 were small (< 400 participants). Of the 58 interventions, 43 targeted curriculum, 56 targeted ethos and environment, and 50 targeted partnerships. Thirty-eight interventions incorporated all three components. For the primary outcomes (dietary outcomes), we assessed 19 studies as overall high risk of bias, with performance and detection bias being most commonly judged as high risk of bias. ECEC-based healthy eating interventions versus usual practice or no intervention may have a positive effect on child diet quality (SMD 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04 to 0.65; P = 0.03, I2 = 91%; 6 studies, 1973 children) but the evidence is very uncertain. There is moderate-certainty evidence that ECEC-based healthy eating interventions likely increase children's consumption of fruit (SMD 0.11, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.18; P < 0.01, I2 = 0%; 11 studies, 2901 children). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions on children's consumption of vegetables (SMD 0.12, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.25; P =0.08, I2 = 70%; 13 studies, 3335 children). There is moderate-certainty evidence that ECEC-based healthy eating interventions likely result in little to no difference in children's consumption of non-core (i.e. less healthy/discretionary) foods (SMD -0.05, 95% CI -0.17 to 0.08; P = 0.48, I2 = 16%; 7 studies, 1369 children) or consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SMD -0.10, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.14; P = 0.41, I2 = 45%; 3 studies, 522 children). Thirty-six studies measured BMI, BMI z-score, weight, overweight and obesity, or waist circumference, or a combination of some or all of these. ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may result in little to no difference in child BMI (MD -0.08, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.07; P = 0.30, I2 = 65%; 15 studies, 3932 children) or in child BMI z-score (MD -0.03, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.03; P = 0.36, I2 = 0%; 17 studies; 4766 children). ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may decrease child weight (MD -0.23, 95% CI -0.49 to 0.03; P = 0.09, I2 = 0%; 9 studies, 2071 children) and risk of overweight and obesity (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.01; P = 0.07, I2 = 0%; 5 studies, 1070 children). ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may be cost-effective but the evidence is very uncertain (6 studies). ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may have little to no effect on adverse consequences but the evidence is very uncertain (3 studies). Few studies measured language and cognitive skills (n = 2), social/emotional outcomes (n = 2) and quality of life (n = 3). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may improve child diet quality slightly, but the evidence is very uncertain, and likely increase child fruit consumption slightly. There is uncertainty about the effect of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions on vegetable consumption. ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may result in little to no difference in child consumption of non-core foods and sugar-sweetened beverages. Healthy eating interventions could have favourable effects on child weight and risk of overweight and obesity, although there was little to no difference in BMI and BMI z-scores. Future studies exploring the impact of specific intervention components, and describing cost-effectiveness and adverse outcomes are needed to better understand how to maximise the impact of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sze Lin Yoong
- Global Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition, Institute for Health Transformation, School of Health and Social Development, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Victoria, Australia
- Hunter New England Population Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Wallsend, Australia
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, Australia
| | - Melanie Lum
- Hunter New England Population Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Wallsend, Australia
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, Australia
| | - Luke Wolfenden
- Hunter New England Population Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Wallsend, Australia
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, Australia
| | - Jacklyn Jackson
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, Australia
| | - Courtney Barnes
- Hunter New England Population Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Wallsend, Australia
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, Australia
| | - Alix E Hall
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, Australia
| | - Sam McCrabb
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, Australia
| | - Nicole Pearson
- Hunter New England Population Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Wallsend, Australia
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, Australia
| | - Cassandra Lane
- Hunter New England Population Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Wallsend, Australia
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, Australia
| | - Jannah Z Jones
- Hunter New England Population Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Wallsend, Australia
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, Australia
| | - Erin Nolan
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, Australia
| | - Lauren Dinour
- College of Education and Human Services, Montclair State University, Montclair, New Jersey, USA
| | - Therese McDonnell
- School of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Systems, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Debbie Booth
- Auchmuty Library, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia
| | - Alice Grady
- Hunter New England Population Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Wallsend, Australia
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Yoong SL, Lum M, Wolfenden L, Jackson J, Barnes C, Hall AE, McCrabb S, Pearson N, Lane C, Jones JZ, Dinour L, McDonnell T, Booth D, Grady A. Healthy eating interventions delivered in early childhood education and care settings for improving the diet of children aged six months to six years. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2023; 6:CD013862. [PMID: 37306513 PMCID: PMC10259732 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd013862.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/13/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Dietary intake during early childhood can have implications on child health and developmental trajectories. Early childhood education and care (ECEC) services are recommended settings to deliver healthy eating interventions as they provide access to many children during this important period. Healthy eating interventions delivered in ECEC settings can include strategies targeting the curriculum (e.g. nutrition education), ethos and environment (e.g. menu modification) and partnerships (e.g. workshops for families). Despite guidelines supporting the delivery of healthy eating interventions in this setting, little is known about their impact on child health. OBJECTIVES To assess the effectiveness of healthy eating interventions delivered in ECEC settings for improving dietary intake in children aged six months to six years, relative to usual care, no intervention or an alternative, non-dietary intervention. Secondary objectives were to assess the impact of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions on physical outcomes (e.g. child body mass index (BMI), weight, waist circumference), language and cognitive outcomes, social/emotional and quality-of-life outcomes. We also report on cost and adverse consequences of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions. SEARCH METHODS We searched eight electronic databases including CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ERIC, Scopus and SportDiscus on 24 February 2022. We searched reference lists of included studies, reference lists of relevant systematic reviews, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov and Google Scholar, and contacted authors of relevant papers. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including cluster-RCTs, stepped-wedge RCTs, factorial RCTs, multiple baseline RCTs and randomised cross-over trials, of healthy eating interventions targeting children aged six months to six years that were conducted within the ECEC setting. ECEC settings included preschools, nurseries, kindergartens, long day care and family day care. To be included, studies had to include at least one intervention component targeting child diet within the ECEC setting and measure child dietary or physical outcomes, or both. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Pairs of review authors independently screened titles and abstracts and extracted study data. We assessed risk of bias for all studies against 12 criteria within RoB 1, which allows for consideration of how selection, performance, attrition, publication and reporting biases impact outcomes. We resolved discrepancies via consensus or by consulting a third review author. Where we identified studies with suitable data and homogeneity, we performed meta-analyses using a random-effects model; otherwise, we described findings using vote-counting approaches and via harvest plots. For measures with similar metrics, we calculated mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes. We calculated standardised mean differences (SMDs) for primary and secondary outcomes where studies used different measures. We applied GRADE to assess certainty of evidence for dietary, cost and adverse outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: We included 52 studies that investigated 58 interventions (described across 96 articles). All studies were cluster-RCTs. Twenty-nine studies were large (≥ 400 participants) and 23 were small (< 400 participants). Of the 58 interventions, 43 targeted curriculum, 56 targeted ethos and environment, and 50 targeted partnerships. Thirty-eight interventions incorporated all three components. For the primary outcomes (dietary outcomes), we assessed 19 studies as overall high risk of bias, with performance and detection bias being most commonly judged as high risk of bias. ECEC-based healthy eating interventions versus usual practice or no intervention may have a positive effect on child diet quality (SMD 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04 to 0.65; P = 0.03, I2 = 91%; 6 studies, 1973 children) but the evidence is very uncertain. There is moderate-certainty evidence that ECEC-based healthy eating interventions likely increase children's consumption of fruit (SMD 0.11, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.18; P < 0.01, I2 = 0%; 11 studies, 2901 children). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions on children's consumption of vegetables (SMD 0.12, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.25; P =0.08, I2 = 70%; 13 studies, 3335 children). There is moderate-certainty evidence that ECEC-based healthy eating interventions likely result in little to no difference in children's consumption of non-core (i.e. less healthy/discretionary) foods (SMD -0.05, 95% CI -0.17 to 0.08; P = 0.48, I2 = 16%; 7 studies, 1369 children) or consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SMD -0.10, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.14; P = 0.41, I2 = 45%; 3 studies, 522 children). Thirty-six studies measured BMI, BMI z-score, weight, overweight and obesity, or waist circumference, or a combination of some or all of these. ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may result in little to no difference in child BMI (MD -0.08, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.07; P = 0.30, I2 = 65%; 15 studies, 3932 children) or in child BMI z-score (MD -0.03, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.03; P = 0.36, I2 = 0%; 17 studies; 4766 children). ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may decrease child weight (MD -0.23, 95% CI -0.49 to 0.03; P = 0.09, I2 = 0%; 9 studies, 2071 children) and risk of overweight and obesity (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.01; P = 0.07, I2 = 0%; 5 studies, 1070 children). ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may be cost-effective but the evidence is very uncertain (6 studies). ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may have little to no effect on adverse consequences but the evidence is very uncertain (3 studies). Few studies measured language and cognitive skills (n = 2), social/emotional outcomes (n = 2) and quality of life (n = 3). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may improve child diet quality slightly, but the evidence is very uncertain, and likely increase child fruit consumption slightly. There is uncertainty about the effect of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions on vegetable consumption. ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may result in little to no difference in child consumption of non-core foods and sugar-sweetened beverages. Healthy eating interventions could have favourable effects on child weight and risk of overweight and obesity, although there was little to no difference in BMI and BMI z-scores. Future studies exploring the impact of specific intervention components, and describing cost-effectiveness and adverse outcomes are needed to better understand how to maximise the impact of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sze Lin Yoong
- Global Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition, Institute for Health Transformation, School of Health and Social Development, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Victoria, Australia
- Hunter New England Population Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Wallsend, Australia
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, Australia
| | - Melanie Lum
- Hunter New England Population Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Wallsend, Australia
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, Australia
| | - Luke Wolfenden
- Hunter New England Population Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Wallsend, Australia
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, Australia
| | - Jacklyn Jackson
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, Australia
| | - Courtney Barnes
- Hunter New England Population Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Wallsend, Australia
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, Australia
| | - Alix E Hall
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, Australia
| | - Sam McCrabb
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, Australia
| | - Nicole Pearson
- Hunter New England Population Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Wallsend, Australia
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, Australia
| | - Cassandra Lane
- Hunter New England Population Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Wallsend, Australia
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, Australia
| | - Jannah Z Jones
- Hunter New England Population Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Wallsend, Australia
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, Australia
| | - Lauren Dinour
- College of Education and Human Services, Montclair State University, Montclair, New Jersey, USA
| | - Therese McDonnell
- School of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Systems, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Debbie Booth
- Auchmuty Library, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia
| | - Alice Grady
- Hunter New England Population Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Wallsend, Australia
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Bryant M, Burton W, Collinson M, Farrin A, Nixon J, Stevens J, Roberts K, Foy R, Rutter H, Copsey B, Hartley S, Tubeuf S, Brown J. A cluster RCT and process evaluation of an implementation optimisation intervention to promote parental engagement enrolment and attendance in a childhood obesity prevention programme: results of the Optimising Family Engagement in HENRY (OFTEN) trial. Trials 2021; 22:773. [PMID: 34740373 PMCID: PMC8569980 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-021-05757-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/23/2021] [Accepted: 10/25/2021] [Indexed: 11/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Poor and variable implementation of childhood obesity prevention programmes reduces their population impact and sustainability. We drew upon ethnographic work to develop a multi-level, theory-based implementation optimisation intervention. This intervention aimed to promote parental enrolment and attendance at HENRY (Health Exercise Nutrition for the Really Young), a UK community obesity prevention programme, by changing behaviours of children’s centre and local authority stakeholders. Methods We evaluated the effectiveness of the implementation optimisation intervention on HENRY programme enrolment and attendance over a 12-month implementation period in a cluster randomised controlled trial. We randomised 20 local government authorities (with 126 children’s centres) to HENRY plus the implementation optimisation intervention or to HENRY alone. Primary outcomes were (1) the proportion of centres enrolling at least eight parents per programme and (2) the proportion of centres with a minimum of 75% of parents attending at least five of eight sessions per programme. Trial analyses adjusted for stratification factors (pre-randomisation implementation of HENRY, local authority size, deprivation) and allowed for cluster design. A parallel mixed-methods process evaluation used qualitative interviews and routine monitoring to explain trial results. Results Neither primary outcome differed significantly between groups; 17.8% of intervention centres and 18.0% of control centres achieved the parent enrolment target (adjusted difference − 1.2%; 95% CI − 19.5%, 17.1%); 17.1% of intervention centres and 13.9% of control centres achieved the attendance target (adjusted difference 1.2%; 95% CI − 15.7%, 18.1%). Unexpectedly, the trial coincided with substantial national service restructuring, including centre closures and reduced funds. Some commissioning and management teams stopped or reduced delivery of both HENRY and the implementation optimisation intervention due to competing demands. Thus, at follow-up, HENRY programmes were delivered to approximately half the number of parents compared to baseline (n = 433 vs. 881). Conclusions During a period in which services were reduced by external policies, this first definitive trial found no evidence of effectiveness for an implementation optimisation intervention promoting parent enrolment to and attendance at an obesity prevention programme. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.govNCT02675699. Registered on 4 February 2016 Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-021-05757-w.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maria Bryant
- Department of Health Sciences and the Hull York Medical School, University of York, YO105DD, York, UK. .,Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK.
| | - Wendy Burton
- Department of Health Sciences and the Hull York Medical School, University of York, YO105DD, York, UK.,Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK
| | - Michelle Collinson
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK
| | - Amanda Farrin
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK
| | - Jane Nixon
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK
| | - June Stevens
- Departments of Nutrition and Epidemiology, Gillings School of Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA
| | - Kim Roberts
- HENRY Head Office, 8 Elm Place, Old Witney Road, Eynsham, OX29 4BD, UK
| | - Robbie Foy
- Academic Unit of Primary Care, Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK
| | - Harry Rutter
- London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London, WC1H 9SH, UK
| | - Bethan Copsey
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK
| | - Suzanne Hartley
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK
| | - Sandy Tubeuf
- Academic Unit of Health Economics, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK.,IRSS-IRES, Université catholique de Louvain, B-1348, Louvain, La-Neuve, Belgium
| | - Julia Brown
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK
| |
Collapse
|