Accelerating Evaluation of Financial Incentives for Fruits and Vegetables: A Case for Shared Measures

Bridging oral health and nutrition: Assessing produce prescription programs in pediatric dental clinics serving low-income communities

OBJECTIVES

This study assesses the needs and feasibility of conducting a produce prescription (produce Rx) program in a pediatric dental clinic setting serving low-income patients.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional quantitative survey examining several household characteristics including demographics, benefits received, fruit and vegetable intake patterns, food security, feasibility of a produce Rx program, and respondents' answers to questions based on social cognitive theory constructs. The survey was administered at the University of Nebraska Medical Center (UNMC) pediatric dental clinic, a pediatric dental residency clinical training site. One hundred adult respondents with low income completed a 36-item questionnaire during their child's dental appointment.

RESULTS

Almost half of respondents reported experiencing food insecurity (45%). Respondents who were food insecure experienced higher levels of nutrition insecurity (p = 0.012), less confidence in choosing fruits and vegetables (FVs) (p = 0.026), difficulty in purchasing FVs in their neighborhood (p = 0.012), and more concern that FVs cost too much (p < 0.001) when compared to respondents who were food secure. Notwithstanding the barriers they face, almost all respondents reported that they eat FVs because of health benefits (95%) and to set a good example for their family (91%). Additionally, most respondents expressed an interest in produce Rx programs (80%) and nutrition education activities (81%).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated the potential for produce Rx program uptake in a pediatric dental clinic setting through positive caregiver-reported need and interest. Future studies should explore how produce Rx programs can be adapted most effectively in this novel setting.

Pediatric produce prescription initiatives in the U.S.: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

To describe pediatric Produce Prescription (PRx) interventions and their study designs, outcomes, and opportunities for future research.

METHODS

A scoping review framework was used to describe PRx interventions published between January 2000 and September 2023. Articles from online databases were uploaded into Covidence. Data on study characteristics, outcomes of interest (health, food insecurity (FI), nutritional and culinary efficacy, and fruit and vegetable (F/V) consumption), and feasibility were extracted. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) was used for quality assessment.

RESULTS

19 articles met inclusion criteria. Ten studies were quantitative, five were qualitative, and four used mixed-methods. Interventions included food vouchers (n = 14) or food box/pantries (n = 5). Four studies allowed food items in addition to F/Vs. Six studies measured changes in FI and five reported a statistically significant decrease. Seven studies measured changes in F/V consumption and five reported a statistically significant increase. One study reported a statistically significant reduction in child BMI z-score. Most studies reported high feasibility. Few studies used high-quality methods.

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric PRx interventions show promising potential to reduce FI and improve diet quality and health-related outcomes. Future studies should utilize rigorous study designs and validated assessment tools to understand the impact of pediatric PRx on health.

IMPACT

This work offers a summary of programmatic outcomes including retention, redemption, incentives, nutrition education, study design and quality limitations to help inform future work. We found positive impacts of pediatric produce prescriptions (PRx) on FI, F/V consumption, and nutritional knowledge and culinary skills. More high-quality, rigorous studies are needed to understand the best delivery and design of PRx and their impact on child behavior and health outcomes. This work provides support for the need for rigorous studies and the potential for PRx to play a role in multi-pronged strategies that address pediatric FI and diet-related disease.

Which Program Implementation Factors Lead to more Fruit and Vegetable Purchases? An Exploratory Analysis of Nutrition Incentive Programs across the United States

Background

Nutrition incentive (NI) programs help low-income households better afford fruits and vegetables (FVs) by providing incentives to spend on FVs (e.g., spend $10 to receive an additional $10 for FVs). NI programs are heterogeneous in programmatic implementation and operate in food retail outlets, including brick-and-mortar and farm-direct sites.

Objective

This study aimed to explore NI program implementation factors and the amount of incentives redeemed.

Methods

A total of 28 NI projects across the United States including 487 brick-and-mortar and 1078 farm-direct sites reported data between 2020 and 2021. Descriptive statistics and linear regression analyses (outcome: incentives redeemed) were applied.

Results

Traditional brick-and-mortar stores had 0.48 times the incentives redeemed compared with small brick-and-mortar stores. At brick-and-mortar sites, automatic discounts had 3.47 times the incentives redeemed compared with physical discounts; and auxiliary services and marketing led to greater redemption. Farm-direct sites using multilingual and direct promotional marketing had greater incentives redeemed.

Conclusions

To our knowledge, this is the first national study to focus on NI program implementation across sites nationwide. Factors identified can help inform future programming and research.

Food Is Medicine: A Presidential Advisory From the American Heart Association

Unhealthy diets are a major impediment to achieving a healthier population in the United States. Although there is a relatively clear sense of what constitutes a healthy diet, most of the US population does not eat healthy food at rates consistent with the recommended clinical guidelines. An abundance of barriers, including food and nutrition insecurity, how food is marketed and advertised, access to and affordability of healthy foods, and behavioral challenges such as a focus on immediate versus delayed gratification, stand in the way of healthier dietary patterns for many Americans. Food Is Medicine may be defined as the provision of healthy food resources to prevent, manage, or treat specific clinical conditions in coordination with the health care sector. Although the field has promise, relatively few studies have been conducted with designs that provide strong evidence of associations between Food Is Medicine interventions and health outcomes or health costs. Much work needs to be done to create a stronger body of evidence that convincingly demonstrates the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different types of Food Is Medicine interventions. An estimated 90% of the $4.3 trillion annual cost of health care in the United States is spent on medical care for chronic disease. For many of these diseases, diet is a major risk factor, so even modest improvements in diet could have a significant impact. This presidential advisory offers an overview of the state of the field of Food Is Medicine and a road map for a new research initiative that strategically approaches the outstanding questions in the field while prioritizing a human-centered design approach to achieve high rates of patient engagement and sustained behavior change. This will ideally happen in the context of broader efforts to use a health equity-centered approach to enhance the ways in which our food system and related policies support improvements in health.

Client experience of food assistance programs among adults in the United States: a qualitative evidence synthesis protocol

Introduction

Policymakers, health practitioners, and other key partners are increasingly focused on ensuring that clients of food assistance programs have positive experiences, a key aspect of high-quality programming. The objectives of this review are to describe the experiences of clients participating in food assistance programs in the United States (US) and to identify ways that these programs promote or hinder positive experiences.

Methods and analysis

We will conduct a qualitative evidence synthesis with partners from food security organizations and community members. Peer-reviewed literature will be systematically searched in Scopus, CINAHL, and AGRICOLA. To identify grey literature, we will use Google's programmable search engine. This review will consider sources that present results of primary qualitative studies that focus on at least one food assistance program in the US and explore the perspectives of adult clients. Only sources published in English or Spanish from 2007 onward will be included. Multiple reviewers will screen articles for inclusion and extract data from articles that meet the inclusion criteria, using a structured data extraction tool. Thematic synthesis or meta-ethnography may be appropriate approaches for synthesizing the extracted data. The final selection of synthesis method will be determined once the set of primary qualitative studies to be included in the review is complete and the type of data presented in these studies is known. We will assess the methodological quality of the included studies using the CASP (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme) tool for qualitative studies and assess the confidence in the review findings using the GRADE-CERQual (Confidence in Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) approach.

Discussion

The findings of this review will inform the development of measures to assess client experience and quality improvement efforts.

How the Gus Schumacher Produce Prescription Program Works: An Adaptation of a Nutrition Incentive Theory of Change

The United States Department of Agriculture's Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Program (GusNIP) supports nutrition incentive (NI) and produce prescription programs (PPRs). PPRs allow healthcare providers to "prescribe" fruits and vegetables (FVs) to patients experiencing low income and/or chronic disease(s) and who screen positive for food insecurity. We developed a Theory of Change (TOC) that summarizes how and why PPRs work, identifies what the programs hope to achieve, and elucidates the causal pathways necessary to achieve their goals. We created the PPR TOC through an iterative, participatory process that adapted our previously developed GusNIP NI TOC. The participatory process involved food and nutrition security experts, healthcare providers, PPR implementors, and PPR evaluators reviewing the existing NI TOC and suggesting modifications to accurately reflect PPRs. The resulting TOC describes the mechanisms, assumptions, rationale, and underpinnings that lead to successful and equitable outcomes. Modifications of the NI TOC centered around equity and focused on inclusion of healthcare as an additional partner and the importance of health and healthcare utilization as outcomes. The TOC describes how the GusNIP PPR program reaches its goals. This understanding will be useful for PPR developers, implementers, funders, and evaluators for describing the pathways, assumptions, and foundations of successful PPRs.

Impact of a farmers' market healthy food subsidy on the diet quality of adults with low incomes in British Columbia, Canada: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Adults with low incomes have lower diet quality than their higher income counterparts. In Canada, the British Columbia Farmers' Market Nutrition Coupon Program (FMNCP) provides coupons to low-income households to purchase healthy foods in farmers' markets.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to examine the impact of the FMNCP on the diet quality of adults with low incomes.

METHOD

In a pragmatic randomized controlled trial conducted in 2019, adults with low incomes (≥18 y) were randomly assigned either to an FMNCP intervention (n = 143) or a no-intervention control group (n = 142). The FMNCP group received 16 coupon sheets valued at $21 per sheet over 10-15 wk to purchase healthy foods from farmers' markets. Participants completed a questionnaire and 2 24-h dietary recalls at baseline (0 wk), immediately post-intervention (10-15 wk), and 16-wk post-intervention (26-31 wk). Diet quality was calculated using the Healthy Eating Index-2015 (HEI-2015). Linear mixed-effects regression assessed differences in HEI-2015 total (primary outcome) and component scores (secondary outcomes) between the FMNCP and control groups at post-intervention and 16-wk post-intervention. Subgroup analyses examined program impacts by sex and age group (18-59 y, ≥60 y).

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in HEI-2015 total scores between the FMNCP and control groups at post-intervention (-0.07; 95% CI: -4.07, 3.93) or 16-wk post-intervention (1.22; 95% CI: -3.00, 5.44) overall or between subgroups. There were no significant between-group differences in HEI-2015 component scores at post-intervention, although there were significant differences in component scores for dairy and fatty acids at 16-wk post-intervention.

CONCLUSION

The FMNCP did not significantly improve diet quality among adults with low incomes over the study period. Further research is needed to explore whether higher subsidy amounts or a longer intervention period is needed to meaningfully improve diet quality among adults with low incomes. This trial was registered at [clinicaltrials.gov] as [NCT03952338].

Improving Fruit and Vegetable Accessibility, Purchasing, and Consumption to Advance Nutrition Security and Health Equity in the United States

In recent years, national and local efforts to improve diet and health in the United States have stressed the importance of nutrition security, which emphasizes consistent access to foods and beverages that promote health and prevent disease among all individuals. At the core of this endeavor is fruit and vegetable (FV) consumption, a dietary practice that is integral to attaining and sustaining a healthy diet. Unfortunately, significant inequities in FV accessibility, purchasing, and consumption exist, particularly among populations that are socially and economically disadvantaged. To achieve nutrition and health equity in the United States, the field must center the goal of nutrition security and initiatives that aim to increase FV consumption, specifically, in future work. The International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (IJERPH) Special Issue titled "Nutrition and Health Equity: Revisiting the Importance of Fruit and Vegetable Availability, Purchasing, and Consumption" features several scholarly publications from experts conducting timely research on these topics. In this commentary, we (1) summarize the U.S.-based literature on inequities in FV accessibility, purchasing, and consumption, (2) describe how the contributions to this IJERPH special issue can advance nutrition security and health equity, and (3) outline future research questions from our perspective.

Additional Fruit and Vegetable Vouchers for Pregnant WIC Clients: An Equity-Focused Strategy to Improve Food Security and Diet Quality

Women with low household income and from racial/ethnic minority groups are at elevated risk of food insecurity. Food insecurity during pregnancy is associated with overall less healthy diets, lower intake of the pregnancy-supportive nutrients iron and folate, and significant variations in diet across the course of a month. The goal of this study was to explore the impact of an ongoing $40/month supplement for fruits and vegetables (F&Vs) provided to pregnant people enrolled in the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women and Children (WIC). Our primary outcome was food insecurity using the USDA 6-item survey, and our secondary outcome was dietary intake of F&Vs based on the 10-item Dietary Screener Questionnaire. Participants in intervention and comparison counties completed surveys at enrollment and approximately three months later (n = 609). Mean ± SD food insecurity at baseline was 3.67 ± 2.79 and 3.47 ± 2.73 in the intervention and comparison groups, respectively, and the adjusted between-group change from baseline to follow-up in food insecurity was 0.05 [95% CI: −0.35, 0.44] (p > 0.05). F&V intake (in cup equivalents) was 2.56 ± 0.95 and 2.51 ± 0.89 at baseline in the two groups, and the adjusted mean between-group difference in changes from baseline was −0.06 [−0.23, 0.11] (p > 0.05). Recruitment and data collection for this study coincided with the most intensive of America’s COVID relief efforts. Our results may indicate that small increases in highly targeted food resources make less of a difference in the context of larger, more general resources being provided to individuals and households in need.

A Preliminary Evaluation of Virginia Fresh Match: Impacts and Demographic Considerations for Future Fruit and Vegetable Incentive Programs

The purpose of this communication is to describe the preliminary evaluation of the Virginia Fresh Match (VFM) financial incentive program for fresh fruits and vegetables for Virginia Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program shoppers and to determine if there were differences in incentive outcomes by race. In this cross-sectional study, a questionnaire was administered to shoppers using Virginia Fresh Match incentives at participating farmers markets and community-based food retail outlets. Repeated measures ANOVAs were used to detect differences in fruit and vegetable consumption between demographic groups over time. Chi-square tests were used to determine if there were associations between race and perceived impact of VFM incentives on making food last and the attribution of VFM incentives to changes in fruit and vegetable consumption frequency. Frequency of fruit and vegetable intake was significantly higher during VFM incentive use, with a difference of 1.17 ± 0.07 and 1.07 ± 0.07 on a Likert scale measure, respectively (p ≤ 0.001). There were racial differences in assertions that VFM incentives helped food to last. VFM incentives were effective at increasing fruit and vegetable consumption, but racial differences should be considered in the administration of VFM to avoid reinforcing systems or approaches that may contribute to disparities in food access and food security.

Successful Community Nutrition Incentive Program Data Collection during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Case Study

Background

The coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has complicated rigorous evaluation of public health nutrition programs. The USDA Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Program (USDA GusNIP) funds nutrition incentive programs to improve fruit and vegetable purchasing and intake by incentivizing Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) participants at the point of sale. GusNIP grantees are required to collect survey data (e.g., fruit and vegetable intake and food insecurity status) on a subset of participants. However, due to COVID-19, most GusNIP grantees faced formidable barriers to data collection. The Hunger Task Force Mobile Market (HTFMM), a Wisconsin-based 2019 GusNIP grantee, used particularly innovative methods to successfully collect these data (n > 500 surveys).

Objectives

The aim was to explore HTFMM's successful participant-level data-collection evaluation during COVID-19.

Methods

A single case study methodological approach framed this study. The case is the HTFMM in Milwaukee, WI, USA. Participants included HTFMM leadership (n = 3), evaluators (n = 2), staff (n = 3), volunteers (n = 3), and customers (n = 10). These teleconference interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were coded using thematic qualitative analysis methods with 2 independent coders.

Results

Four salient themes emerged: 1) there were multiple key players with unique roles and responsibilities who contributed to personalized, proactive, and time-intensive, telephone-based proctored survey collection methods; 2) the importance of resources dedicated to comprehensive evaluation; 3) longstanding relationships rooted in trust and community-based service are key to successful program delivery, engagement, and evaluation; and 4) the COVID-19 data-collection protocol also serves to mitigate nonpandemic challenges to in-person survey collection.

Conclusions

These findings provide guidance on how alternative methods for data collection during COVID-19 can be used and applied to other situations that may affect the ability to collect participant-level data. These findings contribute to a growing body of literature as to best practices and approaches to collecting participant-level data to evaluate public health nutrition programs.

Descriptive Characteristics of Nutrition Incentive Projects Across the U.S.: A Comparison Between Farm Direct and Brick and Mortar Settings

The purpose of this study is to describe the programmatic characteristics of current nutrition incentive projects supported by the Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Program (GusNIP). Specifically, implementation characteristics of nutrition incentive projects that were funded in 2019 were compared across brick and mortar (B&M) and farm direct (FD) sites in the United States. Across 10 nutrition incentive (NI) grantees, there were 621 sites that reported data from B&M (n = 156) and FD (n = 465) locations. Among B&M sites, the common food retail types included: large chain traditional supermarket (n = 49) and independent traditional supermarket (n = 46). Among FD sites, the most frequently reported food retail types were farmers markets (n = 371). For B&M sites, the most common financial instruments were loyalty cards (n = 67, 43.5%), followed by an automatic discount at the register (n = 41, 26.6%), and coupons (n = 29, 18.8%). FD sites frequently reported physical financial instruments including tokens (n = 272, 61.1%), followed by paper vouchers (n = 131, 29.4%). Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) purchases that were eligible to trigger incentives included mainly “all fresh FVs” at B&M sites (n = 98, 48.5%) and “all SNAP eligible items” at FD sites (n = 417, 85.8%). FVs eligible for incentive redemption included mainly “all fresh FVs” for both B&M sites (n = 110, 65.5%) and FD sites (n = 370, 67.6%). In terms of incentive-to-SNAP level ratio, both B&M sites and FD sites reported that they commonly utilized a 1:1 incentive-to-SNAP level ratio (n = 106, 68.8% and n = 261, 94.9% respectively). This paper will provide foundational understanding of the heterogeneity of GusNIP NI projects—specifically between B&M and FD settings—in order to inform future national work and ultimately demonstrate the impact of NI projects on food security status and dietary quality.