Monitoring progress toward United Nations commitments: characteristics of Canadian legislation to promote tobacco control, physical activity and healthy eating. A descriptive study

Increasing Health Behaviors and Psychological Measures with an Adapted Version of the ACCELERATION Program

BACKGROUND

Recent evidence highlights the importance of interventions tackling physical inactivity and unhealthy eating in lower-income countries. The purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness of the Canadian ACCELERATION lifestyle program adapted to Brazilians. The main outcomes of the study were changes in the engagement in weekly moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) and in the daily consumption of fruits/vegetables.

METHODS

The adapted intervention consisted of a 12-week quasi-randomized controlled trial delivered through email. The data from the original Canadian experimental group (CE, n = 194) and the two groups of Portuguese-speaking Brazilians living in Canada in the adapted program - Brazilian experimental (BE, n = 41) and Brazilian control (BC, n = 35) - were assessed at baseline and post-intervention. The data of the 270 participants were analyzed using two-way repeated measures factorial ANCOVA (group x time) for ratio variables and Chi-square and McNemar tests for the categorical variables.

RESULTS

The BE group had a significant increase in MVPA (mean difference, 95% CI: 86.3, 38.1-134.4 min/week) and fruits/vegetables intake (3.2, 1.4-5.1 servings/day) after the intervention (both p < 0.001). The proportion of participants engaging in ≥ 150 min of MVPA increased from 4.9% to 73.2%, while adoption of a healthy diet increased from 4.9% to 53.7% in the BE group (both p < 0.001). The CE group also improved on these variables (p < 0.05) with no difference vs the BE group (p > 0.05), whereas BC did not show changes (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The Brazilian version of the ACCELERATION program effectively promoted positive health behavior changes in its participants and has the potential to contribute to the fight against risk factors for chronic diseases in Brazilians.

Research- vs. government-driven physical activity policy monitoring: a systematic review across different levels of government

BACKGROUND

Even though the importance of physical activity policy monitoring has increased in the last decade, there is a lack of understanding what different approaches exist and which methodology they employ. In order to address this research gap, this review attempts to map existing approaches of physical activity policy monitoring and to analyse methodological aspects, especially with regards to the roles of governments and researchers.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in five scientific databases (PubMed, Scopus, SportDiscus, Psycinfo, Web of Knowledge) in July 2021, and the identified records were screened independently by two reviewers. Records were included if they (a) focused on the monitoring of public policies to promote PA, (b) allowed to compare policies across time, across nations/regions or across policy sectors, and (c) were written in English, German or Russian. During full text analysis, information on methodological aspects was extracted and studies were categorized based on the level of government involvement.

RESULTS

The search yielded in a total of 112 studies. 86 of these studies (76.8%) followed a research-driven approach (little or no government involvement) while only two studies (1.8%) were based on a government-driven approach (led by governments). The remaining 24 studies (21.4%) were based on a co-production approach (strong collaboration between researchers and governments). All in all, 18 different tools for physical activity policy monitoring were identified; key examples are the Report Cards on Physical Activity for Children and Youth (research-driven approach), the HEPA Monitoring Framework (government-driven approach) and the HEPA Policy Audit Tool (co-production approach).

CONCLUSIONS

The level of government involvement in policy monitoring differs significantly, and research-driven, government-driven and co-production approaches can be distinguished. These approaches have different strengths and weaknesses, and can be linked to distinct theories of change and models on research-policy relations. Increasing awareness on the implications of these approaches is key to improve the understanding and further development of physical activity policy monitoring.

Policy Instruments for Health Promotion: A Comparison of WHO Policy Guidance for Tobacco, Alcohol, Nutrition and Physical Activity

BACKGROUND

Policy is an important element of influencing individual health-related behaviours associated to major risk factors for non-communicable diseases (NCDs) such as smoking, alcohol consumption, unhealthy eating and physical inactivity. However, our understanding of the specific measures recommended in NCD prevention policy-making remains limited. This study analysed recent World Health Organization (WHO) documents to identify common policy instruments suggested for national NCD prevention policy and to assess similarities and differences between policies targeting different health-related behaviours.

METHODS

Evert Vedung's typology of policy instruments, which differentiates between regulatory, economic/ fiscal and soft instruments, served as a basis for this analysis. A systematic search on WHO websites was conducted to identify documents relating to tobacco, alcohol, nutrition and physical activity. The staff of the respective units at the WHO Regional Office for Europe conducted an expert validation of these documents. The resulting documents were systematically searched for policy instruments. A word frequency analysis was conducted to estimate the use of individual instruments in the different policy fields, followed by an additional in-depth coding and content analysis by two independent reviewers.

RESULTS

Across all health-related behaviours, the following policy instruments were suggested most frequently in WHO guidance documents: laws, regulations, standards, taxes, prices, campaigns, recommendations, partnerships and coordination. The analysis showed that regulatory and economic/fiscal policy instruments are mainly applied in tobacco and alcohol policy, while soft instruments dominate in the fields of nutrition and especially physical activity.

CONCLUSION

The study confirms perceived differences regarding recommended policy instruments in the different policy fields and supports arguments that "harder" instruments still appear to be underutilized in nutrition and physical activity. However, more comprehensive research is needed, especially with respect to actual instrument use and effectiveness in national-level NCD prevention policy.

Five insights from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019 provides a rules-based synthesis of the available evidence on levels and trends in health outcomes, a diverse set of risk factors, and health system responses. GBD 2019 covered 204 countries and territories, as well as first administrative level disaggregations for 22 countries, from 1990 to 2019. Because GBD is highly standardised and comprehensive, spanning both fatal and non-fatal outcomes, and uses a mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive list of hierarchical disease and injury causes, the study provides a powerful basis for detailed and broad insights on global health trends and emerging challenges. GBD 2019 incorporates data from 281 586 sources and provides more than 3·5 billion estimates of health outcome and health system measures of interest for global, national, and subnational policy dialogue. All GBD estimates are publicly available and adhere to the Guidelines on Accurate and Transparent Health Estimate Reporting. From this vast amount of information, five key insights that are important for health, social, and economic development strategies have been distilled. These insights are subject to the many limitations outlined in each of the component GBD capstone papers.