Dataset Information

Randomized trial of planning tools to reduce unhealthy snacking: Implications for health literacy.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Guidance to address health literacy often focuses on health education rather than tools to facilitate action, despite action being important for self-management. This study evaluated an online intervention informed by health literate design principles and behavior change theory to reduce unhealthy snacking.

Methods

440 participants were recruited online and randomized to an intervention: 1) Health-literate action plan (guided implementation intention); 2) Standard action plan (self-guided implementation intention); 3) Education (healthy snacking fact-sheet). The primary outcome was self-reported unhealthy snacking. Follow-up was at 1 month.

Results

373 participants (84.8%) completed follow-up. Half the sample had adequate health literacy (52%), and the other half had low (24%) or possibly low (25%) health literacy, as measured by Newest Vital Sign (NVS). At follow-up, lower health literacy was associated with more unhealthy snacks and there was no overall difference between intervention groups. However, participants with lower health literacy who used the health-literate action plan reported less unhealthy snacking compared to the standard action plan; the reverse was true for those with higher health literacy scores (b = 1.7, p = 0.03). People scoring 2 points below the mean NVS (M = 3.4, SD = 2.0) using the health-literate action plan reported eating 8 fewer serves of unhealthy snacks, whereas people scoring 2 points above the mean NVS reported eating 6 more serves of unhealthy snacks using the same tool.

Conclusions

These findings suggest that the universal precautions approach currently recommended for health information may be less effective for facilitating action than tailoring to health literacy level.

Trial registration

ANZCTR identifier: ACTRN12617001194358.

SUBMITTER: Ayre J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6336265 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Randomized trial of planning tools to reduce unhealthy snacking: Implications for health literacy.

Ayre Julie J Bonner Carissa C Cvejic Erin E McCaffery Kirsten K

PloS one 20190117 1

<h4>Objective</h4>Guidance to address health literacy often focuses on health education rather than tools to facilitate action, despite action being important for self-management. This study evaluated an online intervention informed by health literate design principles and behavior change theory to reduce unhealthy snacking.<h4>Methods</h4>440 participants were recruited online and randomized to an intervention: 1) Health-literate action plan (guided implementation intention); 2) Standard action ...[more]

PMID: 30653531

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionHealth literacy describes the cognitive and social skills that individuals use to access, understand and act on health information. Health literacy interventions typically take the 'universal precautions approach' where all consumers are presented with simplified materials. Although this approach can improve knowledge and comprehension, its impact on complex behaviours is less clear. Systematic reviews also suggest that health literacy interventions underuse volitional strategies (such as planning) that play an important role in behaviour change. A recent study found volitional strategies may need to be tailored to the participant's health literacy. The current study aims to replicate these findings in a sample of people who have diabetes and/or are overweight or obese as measured by body mass index, and to investigate the most effective method of allocating an action plan to a participant to reduce unhealthy snacking.Methods and analysisWe plan to recruit approximately 2400 participants at baseline. Participants will receive one of two alternative online action plans intended to reduce unhealthy snacking ('standard' action plan or 'literacy-sensitive' action plan). Participants will be randomised to a method of allocation to an action plan: (1) random allocation; (2) allocation by health literacy screening tool or (3) allocation by participant selection. Primary outcome is self-reported serves of unhealthy snacks during the previous month. Multiple linear regression will evaluate the impact of health literacy on intervention effectiveness. The analysis will also identify independent contributions of each action plan, method of allocation, health literacy and participant selections on unhealthy snacking at 4-week follow-up.Ethics and disseminationThis study was approved by the University of Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee (2017/793). Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed international journals, conferences and updates with collaborating public health bodies (Diabetes New South Wales (NSW) & Australian Capital Territory (ACT), and Western Sydney Local Health District).Trial registration numberACTRN12618001409268; Pre-results.

Project description:BackgroundLow health literacy is associated with poorer health outcomes. A key strategy to address health literacy is a universal precautions approach, which recommends using health-literate design for all health interventions, not just those targeting people with low health literacy. This approach has advantages: Health literacy assessment and tailoring are not required. However, action plans may be more effective when tailored by health literacy. This study evaluated the impact of health literacy and action plan type on unhealthy snacking for people who have high BMI or type 2 diabetes (Aim 1) and the most effective method of action plan allocation (Aim 2).Methods and findingsWe performed a 2-stage randomised controlled trial in Australia between 14 February and 6 June 2019. In total, 1,769 participants (mean age: 49.8 years [SD = 11.7]; 56.1% female [n = 992]; mean BMI: 32.9 kg/m2 [SD = 8.7]; 29.6% self-reported type 2 diabetes [n = 523]) were randomised to 1 of 3 allocation methods (random, health literacy screening, or participant selection) and 1 of 2 action plans to reduce unhealthy snacking (standard versus literacy-sensitive). Regression analysis evaluated the impact of health literacy (Newest Vital Sign [NVS]), allocation method, and action plan on reduction in self-reported serves of unhealthy snacks (primary outcome) at 4-week follow-up. Secondary outcomes were perceived extent of unhealthy snacking, difficulty using the plans, habit strength, and action control. Analyses controlled for age, level of education, language spoken at home, diabetes status, baseline habit strength, and baseline self-reported serves of unhealthy snacks. Average NVS score was 3.6 out of 6 (SD = 2.0). Participants reported consuming 25.0 serves of snacks on average per week at baseline (SD = 28.0). Regarding Aim 1, 398 participants in the random allocation arm completed follow-up (67.7%). On average, people scoring 1 SD below the mean for health literacy consumed 10.0 fewer serves per week using the literacy-sensitive action plan compared to the standard action plan (95% CI: 0.05 to 19.5; p = 0.039), whereas those scoring 1 SD above the mean consumed 3.0 fewer serves using the standard action plan compared to the literacy-sensitive action plan (95% CI: -6.3 to 12.2; p = 0.529), although this difference did not reach statistical significance. In addition, we observed a non-significant action plan × health literacy (NVS) interaction (b = -3.25; 95% CI: -6.55 to 0.05; p = 0.054). Regarding Aim 2, 1,177 participants across the 3 allocation method arms completed follow-up (66.5%). There was no effect of allocation method on reduction of unhealthy snacking, including no effect of health literacy screening compared to participant selection (b = 1.79; 95% CI: -0.16 to 3.73; p = 0.067). Key limitations include low-moderate retention, use of a single-occasion self-reported primary outcome, and reporting of a number of extreme, yet plausible, snacking scores, which rendered interpretation more challenging. Adverse events were not assessed.ConclusionsIn our study we observed nominal improvements in effectiveness of action plans tailored to health literacy; however, these improvements did not reach statistical significance, and the costs associated with such strategies compared with universal precautions need further investigation. This study highlights the importance of considering differential effects of health literacy on intervention effectiveness.Trial registrationAustralia and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN12618001409268.

Project description:BackgroundDespite excessive consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB), little is known about behavioral interventions to reduce SSB intake among adults, particularly in medically-underserved rural communities. This type 1 effectiveness-implementation hybrid RCT, conducted in 2012-2014, applied the RE-AIM framework and was designed to assess the effectiveness of a behavioral intervention targeting SSB consumption (SIPsmartER) when compared to an intervention targeting physical activity (MoveMore) and to determine if health literacy influenced retention, engagement or outcomes.MethodsGuided by the Theory of Planned Behavior and health literacy strategies, the 6 month multi-component intervention for both conditions included three small-group classes, one live teach-back call, and 11 interactive voice response calls. Validated measures were used to assess SSB consumption (primary outcome) and all secondary outcomes including physical activity behaviors, theory-based constructs, quality of life, media literacy, anthropometric, and biological outcomes.ResultsTargeting a medically-underserved rural region in southwest Virginia, 1056 adult participants were screened, 620 (59%) eligible, 301 (49%) enrolled and randomized, and 296 included in these 2015 analyses. Participants were 93% Caucasian, 81% female, 31 % ≤ high-school educated, 43% < $14,999 household income, and 33% low health literate. Retention rates (74%) and program engagement was not statistically different between conditions. Compared to MoveMore, SIPsmartER participants significantly decreased SSB kcals and BMI at 6 months. SIPsmartER participants significantly decreased SSB intake by 227 (95% CI = -326,-127, p < 0.001) kcals/day from baseline to 6 months when compared to the decrease of 53 (95% CI = -88,-17, p < 0.01) kcals/day among MoveMore participants (p < 0.001). SIPsmartER participants decreased BMI by 0.21 (95% CI = -0.35,-0.06; p < 0.01) kg/m(2) from baseline to 6 months when compared to the non-significant 0.10 (95 % CI = -0.23, 0.43; NS) kg/m(2) gain among MoveMore participants (p < 0.05). Significant 0-6 month effects were observed for about half of the theory-based constructs, but for no biological outcomes. Health literacy status did not influence retention rates, engagement or outcomes.ConclusionsSIPsmartER is an effective intervention to decrease SSB consumption among adults and is promising for translation into practice settings. SIPsmartER also yielded small, yet significant, improvements in BMI. By using health literacy-focused strategies, the intervention was robust in achieving reductions for participants of varying health literacy status.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov; ID: NCT02193009 .

Project description:Unhealthy infant feeding practices, such as a combination of formula feeding and early introduction of solids may lead to rapid or excessive weight gain in early infancy. Adolescent mothers' feeding behaviors are most directly related to infant weight gain in the first year of life. Compared to adult mothers, adolescent mothers are less knowledgeable, less responsive, more controlling, and less skilled in infant feeding, which interferes with infants' healthy growth. The Tools for Teen Moms trial aims to compare the effect of a social media intervention for low-income adolescent, first-time mothers of infants 2 months of age or younger, versus standard care on infant weight, maternal responsiveness, and feeding style and practices. The intervention is conducted during the infant's first four months of life to promote healthy transition to solids during their first year. Tools for Teen Moms is an intervention delivered via a social media platform that actively engages and coaches low-income adolescent mothers in infant-centered feeding to reduce rapid/excessive infant weight gain in the first six months of life.We describe our study protocol for a randomized control trial with an anticipated sample of 100 low-income African- American and Caucasian adolescent, first-time mothers of infants. Participants are recruited through Maternal-Infant Health Programs in four counties in Michigan, USA. Participants are randomly assigned to the intervention or the control group. The intervention provides infant feeding information to mothers via a web-based application, and includes daily behavioral challenges, text message reminders, discussion forums, and website information as a comprehensive social media strategy over 6 weeks. Participants continue to receive usual care during the intervention. Main maternal outcomes include: (a) maternal responsiveness, (b) feeding style, and (c) feeding practices. The primary infant outcome is infant weight. Data collection occurs at baseline, and when the baby is 3 and 6 months old.Expected outcomes will address the effectiveness of the social media intervention in helping teen mothers develop healthy infant feeding practices that contribute to reducing the risk of early onset childhood obesity.Clinical Trials.Gov NCT02244424, June 24, 2014.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Many young people form unhealthy behavioural habits, such as low intake of fruit and vegetables, high intake of energy-dense snack foods, and excessive sedentary screen-based behaviours. However, there is a shortage of parent-and home-focused interventions to change multiple health behaviours in children. METHODS:Kids FIRST was a 12-week, home- and school-based pilot randomised controlled trial to reduce screen-time and unhealthy snacking with assessments at pre- (baseline) and post-intervention. Four UK schools were randomised to control or one of three interventions targeting reductions in (1) screen-time and unhealthy snacking (ST?+?Sn), (2) screen-time (ST only), (3) unhealthy snacking (Sn only), and parents with children aged 9-11?years were recruited via schools. Intervention group parents received four online 'sessions' and four packages of resources tailored to each group. Children received four 30-min lessons during school time. Children and parents reported their own screen-time behaviours, children reported their own snacking behaviours. Descriptive analyses were undertaken using principles of intention to treat. RESULTS:Initial feasibility was shown in that this study successfully recruited schools and families into all four study arms and retained them over a period of 13?weeks (retention rate???74%). Seventy-five children and 64 parents provided full baseline questionnaire data. Reductions in children's school day and weekend day TV/DVD viewing and computer game use were found in the ST?+?Sn and ST groups, while self-reported smartphone use increased in these groups. Similar results were found for parents' TV/DVD, computer and smartphone use in these groups. Little to no changes were found in reports of the dietary variables assessed in any intervention group for children or parents. CONCLUSIONS:These preliminary findings show some promise for the Kids FIRST intervention. Based on these findings, a future full trial should recruit a more diverse sample of families and optimise the intervention and intervention resources to more fully engage parents with the dietary-based components of the intervention programme, where fewer changes were seen. Although most parents reporting receiving the intervention resources, further development work is required to achieve higher levels of engagement. This might include greater parent and child engagement work early in the development of the project. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Retrospectively registered in June 21st 2019 with ClinicalTrials.gov (number NCT03993652).

Project description:BackgroundHealth literacy (HL) is seen as an increasingly relevant issue for global public health and requires a reliable and comprehensive operationalization. By now, there is limited evidence on how the development of tools measuring HL proceeded in recent years and if scholars considered existing methodological guidance when developing an instrument.MethodsWe performed a systematic review of generic measurement tools developed to assess HL by searching PubMed, ERIC, CINAHL and Web of Knowledge (2009 forward). Two reviewers independently reviewed abstracts/ full text articles for inclusion according to predefined criteria. Additionally we conducted a reporting quality appraisal according to the survey reporting guideline SURGE.ResultsWe identified 17 articles reporting on the development and validation of 17 instruments measuring health literacy. More than two thirds of all instruments are based on a multidimensional construct of health literacy. Moreover, there is a trend towards a mixed measurement (self-report and direct test) of health literacy with 41% of instruments applying it, though results strongly indicate a weakness of coherence between the underlying constructs measured. Overall, almost every third instrument is based on assessment formats modeled on already existing functional literacy screeners such as the REALM or the TOFHLA and 30% of the included articles do not report on significant reporting features specified in the SURGE guideline.ConclusionsScholars recently developing instruments that measure health literacy mainly comply with recommendations of the academic circle by applying multidimensional constructs and mixing up measurement approaches to capture health literacy comprehensively. Nonetheless, there is still a dependence on assessment formats, rooted in functional literacy measurement contradicting the widespread call for new instruments. All things considered, there is no clear "consensus" on HL measurement but a convergence to more comprehensive tools. Giving attention to this finding can help to offer direction towards the development of comparable and reliable health literacy assessment tools that effectively respond to the informational needs of populations.

Dataset Information

Randomized trial of planning tools to reduce unhealthy snacking: Implications for health literacy.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration

Publications

Randomized trial of planning tools to reduce unhealthy snacking: Implications for health literacy.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets