Dataset Information

Nutritional Profile of Purchases by Store Type: Disparities by Income and Food Program Participation.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:Policymakers have focused on the food retail environment for improving the dietary quality for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) participants. Yet little is known about where SNAP households make food and beverage purchases or how purchases may vary by store type, SNAP participation, and income level. The objective of this study was to examine the association between SNAP-income status (participant, income-eligible non-participant, higher-income non-participant) and healthfulness of household purchases across store types. METHODS:Data included household packaged food purchases (N=76,458 unique households) from 2010 to 2014, analyzed in 2017 with multivariable adjusted models to examine the nutritional profile of purchases by store type (grocery, convenience, big box, and other stores) for SNAP participating households, income-eligible non-participants, and higher-income non-participants. Outcomes included volume and nutrients (kilocalories, total sugar, saturated fat, and sodium) and calories from food groups. RESULTS:All households purchased the greatest volume of foods and beverages from grocery stores, followed by big-box and other stores, with relatively little purchased from convenience stores. The largest differences between SNAP participants and non-participants were observed at grocery stores and big-box stores, where SNAP households purchased more calories from starchy vegetables, processed meat, desserts, sweeteners and toppings, total junk food, sugar-sweetened beverages, and milk, than income-eligible and higher-income SNAP non-participants. SNAP purchases also had considerably higher sodium density. Across store types, the nutritional profile of income-eligible non-participants' purchases was similar to higher-income households' purchases. CONCLUSIONS:More research is needed to identify strategies to improve the nutritional profile of purchases among SNAP households.

SUBMITTER: Taillie LS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6054884 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Nutritional Profile of Purchases by Store Type: Disparities by Income and Food Program Participation.

Taillie Lindsey Smith LS Grummon Anna H AH Miles Donna R DR

American journal of preventive medicine 20180615 2

<h4>Introduction</h4>Policymakers have focused on the food retail environment for improving the dietary quality for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) participants. Yet little is known about where SNAP households make food and beverage purchases or how purchases may vary by store type, SNAP participation, and income level. The objective of this study was to examine the association between SNAP-income status (participant, income-eligible non-participant, higher-income non-participan ...[more]

PMID: 29910116

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionThe Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) required major revisions to food packages in 2009; effects on nationwide low-income household purchases remain unexamined.MethodsThis study examines associations between WIC revisions and nutritional profiles of packaged food purchases from 2008 to 2014 among 4,537 low-income households with preschoolers in the U.S. (WIC participating versus nonparticipating) utilizing Nielsen Homescan Consumer Panel data. Overall nutrients purchased (e.g., calories, sugar, fat), amounts of select food groups with nutritional attributes that are encouraged (e.g., whole grains, fruits and vegetables) or discouraged (e.g., sugar-sweetened beverages, candy) consistent with dietary guidance, composition of purchases by degree of processing (less, moderate, or high), and convenience (requires preparation, ready to heat, or ready to eat) were measured. Data analysis was performed in 2016. Longitudinal random-effects model adjusted outcomes controlling for household composition, education, race/ethnicity of the head of the household, county quarterly unemployment rates, and seasonality are presented.ResultsAmong WIC households, significant decreases in purchases of calories (-11%), sodium (-12%), total fat (-10%), and sugar (-15%) occurred, alongside decreases in purchases of refined grains, grain-based desserts, higher-fat milks, and sugar-sweetened beverages, and increases in purchases of fruits/vegetables with no added sugar/fats/salt. Income-eligible nonparticipating households had similar, but less pronounced, reductions. Changes were gradual and increased over time.ConclusionsWIC food package revisions appear associated with improved nutritional profiles of food purchases among WIC participating households compared with low-income nonparticipating households. These package revisions may encourage WIC families to make healthier choices among their overall packaged food purchases.

Project description:The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) provides millions of low-income Americans food benefits and other forms of nutrition assistance. Evidence indicates that SNAP reduces food insecurity. However, there is a concern that the food benefit may increase the demand for less healthy foods more than healthier foods, thereby reducing the overall nutritional quality of the participant's food basket. This paper aims to examine the association of SNAP participation with the nutritional quality of food-at-home purchases of low-income households and to investigate the potential heterogeneity among consumers with different levels of nutrition attitude. This analysis used food purchase data from the USDA National Household Food Acquisition and Purchase Survey (FoodAPS). Our study sample included 2,218 low-income households, of which 1,184 are SNAP participants, and 1,034 are income-eligible nonparticipants. Multivariate regressions were performed to explore the SNAP-nutritional quality association. A household's nutrition attitude was measured using its response to a question on whether the household searched for nutrition information online in the last 2 months. Households that affirmed they had an online nutrition search were treated as nutrition-oriented households (21.2% of the low-income sample), and households that did not were considered less nutrition-oriented households (78.8%). For robustness, we also created an alternative nutrition attitude measure based on reported use of the nutrition facts label. We found that among less nutrition-oriented households, SNAP participants had a statistically significant 0.097 points (p = 0.018) lower Guiding Stars rating than low-income nonparticipants. However, there was no significant SNAP-nutritional quality association among nutrition-oriented households. In conclusion, SNAP participation was associated with lower nutritional quality of food purchases among less nutrition-oriented households, but not among nutrition-oriented households. The results suggest that the intended nutritional benefits of restrictions on purchases of healthy foods may not reach the subgroup of nutrition-oriented SNAP participants.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Many lower-income and racially diverse communities in the U.S. have limited access to healthy foods, with few supermarkets and many small convenience stores, which tend to stock limited quantities and varieties of healthy foods. To address food access, in 2015 the Minneapolis Staple Foods Ordinance became the first policy requiring food stores to stock minimum quantities and varieties of 10 categories of healthy foods/beverages, including fruits, vegetables, whole grains and other staples, through licensing. This study examined whether: (a) stores complied, (b) overall healthfulness of store environments improved, (c) healthy customer purchases increased, and (d) healthfulness of home food environments improved among frequent small store shoppers. METHODS:Data for this natural (or quasi) experiment were collected at four times: pre-policy (2014), implementation only (no enforcement, 2015), enforcement initiation (2016) and continued monitoring (2017). In-person store assessments were conducted to evaluate food availability, price, quality, marketing and placement in randomly sampled food retailers in Minneapolis (n?=?84) and compared to those in a nearby control city, St. Paul, Minnesota (n?=?71). Stores were excluded that were: supermarkets, authorized through WIC (Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children), and specialty stores (e.g., spice shops). Customer intercept interviews were conducted with 3,039 customers exiting stores. Home visits, including administration of home food inventories, were conducted with a sub-sample of frequent shoppers (n?=?88). RESULTS:Overall, findings indicated significant improvements in healthy food offerings by retailers over time in both Minneapolis and St. Paul, with no significant differences in change between the two cities. Compliance was low; in 2017 only 10% of Minneapolis retailers in the sample were fully compliant, and 51% of participating Minneapolis retailers met at least 8 of the 10 required standards. Few changes were observed in the healthfulness of customer purchases or the healthfulness of home food environments among frequent shoppers, and changes were not different between cities. CONCLUSIONS:This study is the first evaluation a local staple foods ordinance in the U.S. and reflects the challenges and time required for implementing such policies. TRIAL REGISTRATION:NCT02774330 .

Project description:ImportanceFood insecurity is associated with a less healthy diet. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is associated with reduced food insecurity, but benefit levels may be insufficient for beneficiaries to afford healthy foods.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether participation in SuperSNAP, a program that provides an additional $40 per month for the purchase of fruits and vegetables with no added sugar, sodium, or fat to SNAP beneficiaries, is associated with changes in food purchasing.Design, setting, and participantsThis longitudinal cohort study used data from transaction records of a large supermarket chain with approximately 500 stores located across North Carolina from October 2019 to April 2020. Participants were SNAP beneficiaries.ExposureSuperSNAP participation.Main outcomes and measuresMonthly spending on all fruits, vegetables, legumes, and nuts (primary outcome); spending on less healthy food categories; and spending on sugar-sweetened beverages as 1 category of less healthy foods. Monthly data on purchases by SNAP beneficiaries before and during SuperSNAP participation were compared with data from SNAP beneficiaries not enrolled in the program who shopped at the same stores. Overlap weighting (a propensity score-based method) was used to account for confounding, and linear mixed-effects models were fitted with random effects to account for repeated measures and clustering by store.ResultsThe study included 667 SuperSNAP participants and 33 246 SNAP beneficiaries who did not use SuperSNAP but shopped in the same stores; 436 SuperSNAP participants had preintervention data and were included in the main analysis. SuperSNAP participation was associated with increased monthly purchases of fruits, vegetables, nuts, and legumes ($31.84; 95% CI, $31.27-$32.42; P < .001; 294.52 oz; 95% CI, 288.84-300.20 oz; P < .001). Only a small increase in spending on less healthy food categories compared with the SNAP beneficiaries who did not use SuperSNAP ($1.60; 95% CI, $0.67-$2.53; P < .001) was observed. As total spending increased, the proportion of total food and beverage spending on less healthy foods significantly decreased (difference, 4.51%; 95% CI, 4.27%-4.74%; P < .001). Monthly spending on sugar-sweetened beverages decreased (difference, $1.83; 95% CI, $1.30-$2.36; P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study, participation in SuperSNAP was associated with meaningful increases in healthy food purchasing. Subsequent studies should investigate whether healthy food incentive programs improve health outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundThe HealthyFood (HF) program offers members up to 25% cash back monthly on healthy food purchases. In this randomized controlled trial, we tested the efficacy of financial incentives combined with text messages in increasing healthy food purchases among HF members.MethodsMembers receiving the lowest (10%) cash back level were randomized to one of six arms: Arm 1 (Usual Care): 10% cash back, no weekly text, standard monthly text; Arm 2: 10% cash back, generic weekly text, standard monthly text; Arm 3: 10% cash back, personalized weekly text, standard monthly text; Arm 4: 25% cash back, personalized weekly text, standard monthly text; Arm 5: 10 + 15%NET cash back, personalized weekly text, standard monthly text; and, Arm 6: 10 + 15%NET cash back, personalized weekly text, unbundled monthly text. In the 10 + 15%NET cash back, the cash back amount was the baseline 10% plus 15% of the net difference between healthy and unhealthy spending. The generic text included information on HF and healthy eating, while the personalized text had individualized feedback on purchases. The standard monthly text contained the cash back amount. The unbundled monthly text included the amount lost due to unhealthy purchases. The primary outcome was the average monthly percent healthy food spending. Secondary outcomes were the percent unhealthy food spending, and the percent healthy and unhealthy food items.ResultsOf the members contacted, 20 opted out, and 2841 met all inclusion criteria. There were no between-arm differences in the examined outcomes. The largest mean (standard deviation) difference in percent healthy spending was between Arm 1 (24.8% [11%]) and Arm 2 (26.8% [13%]), and the largest mean difference in percent unhealthy spending was also between Arm 1 (24.4% [20%]) and Arm 2 (21.7% [17%]), but no differences were statistically significant after correction for multiple comparisons.ConclusionsNone of the tested financial incentive structures or text strategies differentially affected food purchasing. Notably, more than doubling the cash back amount and introducing a financial disincentive for unhealthy purchases did not affect purchasing. These findings speak to the difficulty of changing shopping habits and to the need for innovative strategies to shift complex health behaviors.Trial registrationNCT02486588 Increasing Engagement with a Healthy Food Benefit. The trial was prospectively registered on July 1, 2015.

Dataset Information

Nutritional Profile of Purchases by Store Type: Disparities by Income and Food Program Participation.

Publications

Nutritional Profile of Purchases by Store Type: Disparities by Income and Food Program Participation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets