Dataset Information

Health and Economic Impacts of the National Menu Calorie Labeling Law in the United States: A Microsimulation Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Excess caloric intake is linked to weight gain, obesity, and related diseases, including type 2 diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular disease (CVD). Obesity incidence is rising, with nearly 3 in 4 US adults being overweight or obese. In 2018, the US federal government finalized the implementation of mandatory labeling of calorie content on all menu items across major chain restaurants nationally as a strategy to support informed consumer choice, reduce caloric intake, and potentially encourage restaurant reformulations. Yet, the potential health and economic impacts of this policy remain unclear.

Methods and results

We used a validated microsimulation model (CVD-PREDICT) to estimate reductions in CVD events, diabetes mellitus cases, gains in quality-adjusted life years, costs, and cost-effectiveness of the menu calorie labeling intervention, based on consumer responses alone, and further accounting for potential industry reformulation. The model incorporated nationally representative demographic and dietary data from National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys 2009 to 2016; policy effects on consumer diets and body mass index-disease effects from published meta-analyses; and policy effects on industry reformulation, policy costs (policy administration, industry compliance, and reformulation), and health-related costs (formal and informal healthcare costs, productivity costs) from established sources or reasonable assumptions. We modeled change in calories to change in weight using an established dynamic weight-change model, assuming 50% of expected calorie reductions would translate to long-term reductions. Findings were evaluated over 5 years and a lifetime from healthcare and societal perspectives, with uncertainty incorporated in both 1-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Between 2018 and 2023, implementation of the restaurant menu calorie labeling law was estimated, based on consumer response alone, to prevent 14 698 new CVD cases (including 1575 CVD deaths) and 21 522 new type 2 diabetes mellitus cases, gaining 8749 quality-adjusted life years. Over a lifetime, corresponding values were 135 781 new CVD cases (including 27 646 CVD deaths), 99 736 type 2 diabetes mellitus cases, and 367 450 quality-adjusted life years. Assuming modest restaurant item reformulation, both health and economic benefits were estimated to be about 2-fold larger than based on consumer response alone. The consumer response alone was estimated to be cost-saving by 2023, with net lifetime savings of $10.42B from a healthcare perspective and $12.71B from a societal perspective. Findings were robust in a range of sensitivity analyses.

Conclusions

Our national model suggests that the full implementation of the US calorie menu labeling law will generate significant health gains and healthcare and societal cost-savings. Industry responses to modestly reformulate menu items would provide even larger additional benefits.

SUBMITTER: Liu J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7299757 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background Produce prescription programs, providing free or discounted produce and nutrition education to patients with diet-related conditions within health care systems, have been shown to improve dietary quality and cardiometabolic risk factors. The potential impact of implementing produce prescription programs for patients with diabetes on long-term health gains, costs, and cost-effectiveness in the United States has not been established. Methods and Results We used a validated state-transition microsimulation model (Diabetes, Obesity, Cardiovascular Disease Microsimulation model), populated with national data of eligible individuals from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2013 to 2018, further incorporating estimated intervention effects and diet-disease effects from meta-analyses, and policy- and health-related costs from published literature. The model estimated that over a lifetime (mean=25 years), implementing produce prescriptions in 6.5 million US adults with both diabetes and food insecurity (lifetime treatment) would prevent 292 000 (95% uncertainty interval, 143 000-440 000) cardiovascular disease events, generate 260 000 (110000-411 000) quality-adjusted life-years, cost $44.3 billion in implementation costs, and save $39.6 billion ($20.5-58.6 billion) in health care costs and $4.8 billion ($1.84-$7.70 billion) in productivity costs. The program was highly cost effective from a health care perspective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio: $18 100/quality-adjusted life-years) and cost saving from a societal perspective (net savings: $-0.05 billion). The intervention remained cost effective at shorter time horizons of 5 and 10 years. Results were similar in population subgroups by age, race or ethnicity, education, and baseline insurance status. Conclusions Our model suggests that implementing produce prescriptions among US adults with diabetes and food insecurity would generate substantial health gains and be highly cost effective.

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate whether calorie labeling of menus in large restaurant chains was associated with a change in mean calories purchased per transaction.DesignQuasi-experimental longitudinal study.SettingLarge franchise of a national fast food company with three different restaurant chains located in the southern United States (Louisiana, Texas, and Mississippi) from April 2015 until April 2018.Participants104 restaurants with calorie information added to in-store and drive-thru menus in April 2017 and with weekly aggregated sales data during the pre-labeling (April 2015 to April 2017) and post-labeling (April 2017 to April 2018) implementation period.Main outcome measuresPrimary outcome was the overall level and trend changes in mean purchased calories per transaction after implementation of calorie labeling compared with the counterfactual (ie, assumption that the pre-intervention trend would have persisted had the intervention not occurred) using interrupted time series analyses with linear mixed models. Secondary outcomes were by item category (entrees, sides, and sugar sweetened beverages). Subgroup analyses estimated the effect of calorie labeling in stratums defined by the sociodemographic characteristics of restaurant census tracts (defined region for taking census).ResultsThe analytic sample comprised 14 352 restaurant weeks. Over three years and among 104 restaurants, 49 062 440 transactions took place and 242 726 953 items were purchased. After labeling implementation, a level decrease was observed of 60 calories/transaction (95% confidence interval 48 to 72; about 4%), followed by an increasing trend of 0.71 calories/transaction/week (95% confidence interval 0.51 to 0.92) independent of the baseline trend over the year after implementation. These results were generally robust to different analytic assumptions in sensitivity analyses. The level decrease and post-implementation trend change were stronger for sides than for entrees or sugar sweetened beverages. The level decrease was similar between census tracts with higher and lower median income, but the post-implementation trend in calories per transaction was higher in low income (change in calories/transaction/week 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.67 to 1.21) than in high income census tracts (0.50, 0.19 to 0.81).ConclusionsA small decrease in mean calories purchased per transaction was observed after implementation of calorie labeling in a large franchise of fast food restaurants. This reduction diminished over one year of follow-up.

Project description:BackgroundCalorie menu labeling is a policy that requires food establishments to post the calories on menu offerings to encourage healthy food choice. Calorie labeling has been implemented in the United States since May 2018 per the Affordable Care Act, but to the best of our knowledge, no studies have evaluated the relationship between calorie labeling and meal purchases since nationwide implementation of this policy. Our objective was to investigate the relationship between calorie labeling and the calorie and nutrient content of purchased meals after a fast food franchise began labeling in April 2017, prior to the required nationwide implementation, and after nationwide implementation of labeling in May 2018, when all large US chain restaurants were required to label their menus.Methods and findingsWe obtained weekly aggregated sales data from 104 restaurants that are part of a fast food franchise for 3 national chains in 3 US states: Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. The franchise provided all sales data from April 2015 until April 2019. The franchise labeled menus in April 2017, 1 year prior to the required nationwide implementation date of May 2018 set by the US Food and Drug Administration. We obtained nutrition information for items sold (calories, fat, carbohydrates, protein, saturated fat, sugar, dietary fiber, and sodium) from Menustat, a publicly available database with nutrition information for items offered at the top revenue-generating US restaurant chains. We used an interrupted time series to find level and trend changes in mean weekly calorie and nutrient content per transaction after franchise and nationwide labeling. The analytic sample represented 331,776,445 items purchased across 67,112,342 transactions. Franchise labeling was associated with a level change of -54 calories/transaction (95% confidence interval [CI]: -67, -42, p < 0.0001) and a subsequent 3.3 calories/transaction increase per 4-week period (95% CI: 2.5, 4.1, p < 0.0001). Nationwide implementation was associated with a level decrease of -82 calories/transaction (95% CI: -88, -76, p < 0.0001) and a subsequent -2.1 calories/transaction decrease per 4-week period (95% CI: -2.9, -1.3, p < 0.0001). At the end of the study, the model-based predicted mean calories/transaction was 4.7% lower (change = -73 calories/transaction, 95% CI: -81, -65), and nutrients/transaction ranged from 1.8% lower (saturated fat) to 7.0% lower (sugar) than what we would expect had labeling not been implemented. The main limitations were potential residual time-varying confounding and lack of individual-level transaction data.ConclusionsIn this study, we observed that calorie labeling was associated with small decreases in mean calorie and nutrient content of fast food meals 2 years after franchise labeling and nearly 1 year after implementation of labeling nationwide. These changes imply that calorie labeling was associated with small improvements in purchased meal quality in US chain restaurants.

Project description:BackgroundFully assessing the mortality burden of the COVID-19 pandemic requires measuring years of life lost (YLLs) and accounting for quality-of-life differences.ObjectiveTo measure YLLs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) lost from the COVID-19 pandemic, by age, sex, race/ethnicity, and comorbidity.DesignState-transition microsimulation model.Data sourcesHealth and Retirement Study, Panel Study of Income Dynamics, data on excess deaths from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and nursing home death counts from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.Target populationU.S. population aged 25 years and older.Time horizonLifetime.PerspectiveIndividual.InterventionCOVID-19 pandemic through 13 March 2021.Outcome measuresYLLs and QALYs lost per 10 000 persons in the population. The estimates account for the age, sex, and race/ethnicity of decedents, along with obesity, smoking behavior, lung disease, heart disease, diabetes, cancer, stroke, hypertension, dementia, and nursing home residence.Results of base-case analysisThe COVID-19 pandemic resulted in 6.62 million QALYs lost (9.08 million YLLs) through 13 March 2021, with 3.6 million (54%) lost by those aged 25 to 64 years. The greatest toll was on Black and Hispanic communities, especially among men aged 65 years or older, who lost 1138 and 1371 QALYs, respectively, per 10 000 persons. Absent the pandemic, 38% of decedents would have had average or above-average life expectancies for their subgroup defined by age, sex, and race/ethnicity.Results of sensitivity analysisAccounting for uncertainty in risk factors for death from COVID-19 yielded similar results.LimitationEstimates may vary depending on assumptions about mortality and quality-of-life projections.ConclusionBeyond excess deaths alone, the COVID-19 pandemic imposed a greater life expectancy burden on persons aged 25 to 64 years, including those with average or above-average life expectancies, and a disproportionate burden on Black and Hispanic communities.Primary funding sourceNational Institute on Aging.

Project description:ImportanceCalorie labeling on menus is required in US chain food establishments with 20 or more locations. This policy may encourage retailers to offer lower-calorie items, which could lead to a public health benefit by reducing customers' calorie intake from prepared foods. However, potential reformulation of restaurant menu items has not been examined since nationwide enforcement of this policy in 2018.ObjectiveTo examine the calorie content of menu items at large chain restaurants before and after implementation of federally mandated menu calorie labels.Design, setting, and participantsThis pre-post cohort study used restaurant menu data from MenuStat, a database of nutrition information for menu items offered in the largest chain restaurants in the US, collected annually from 2012 to 2019. The study comprised 35 354 menu items sold at 59 large chain restaurants in the US. Statistical analysis was conducted from February 4 to October 8, 2021.InterventionNationwide implementation of menu calorie labeling.Main outcomes and measuresChanges in menu items' calorie content after restaurant chains implemented calorie labels were estimated, adjusting for prelabeling trends. All menu items, continuously available items, items newly introduced to menus, and items removed from menus were examined separately.ResultsAmong the 59 restaurant chains included in the study, after labeling, there were no changes in mean calorie content for all menu items (change = -2.0 calories; 95% CI, -8.5 to 4.4 calories) or continuously available items (change = -2.3 calories; 95% CI, -11.5 to 6.3 calories). Items that were newly introduced after labeling, however, had a lower mean calorie content than items introduced before labeling (change = -112.9 calories; 95% CI, -208.6 to -25.2 calories), although there was heterogeneity by restaurant type. Items removed from menus after labeling had similar calorie content as items removed before labeling (change = 0.5 calories; 95% CI, -79.4 to 84.0 calories).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study of large chain restaurants, implementing calorie labels on menus was associated with the introduction of lower-calorie items but no changes in continuously available or removed items.