The impact of financial incentives and restrictions on cyclical food expenditures among low-income households receiving nutrition assistance: a randomized controlled trial.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is the largest anti-hunger program in the United States. Two proposed interventions to encourage healthier food expenditures among SNAP participants have generated significant debate: financial incentives for fruits and vegetables, and restrictions on foods high in added sugar. To date, however, no study has assessed the impact of these interventions on the benefit cycle, a pattern of rapid depletion of SNAP benefits that has been linked to worsening nutrition and health outcomes over the benefit month.Methods
Low-income households not currently enrolled in SNAP (n = 249) received benefits every 4 weeks for 12 weeks on a study-specific benefit card. Households were randomized to one of four study arms: 1) incentive (30% incentive for fruits and vegetables purchased with study benefits), 2) restriction (not allowed to buy sugar-sweetened beverages, sweet baked goods, or candy using study benefits), 3) incentive plus restriction, or 4) control (no incentive or restriction). Weekly household food expenditures were evaluated using generalized estimating equations.Results
Compared to the control group, financial incentives increased fruit and vegetable purchases, but only in the first 2 weeks after benefit disbursement. Restrictions decreased expenditures on foods high in added sugar throughout the benefit month, but the magnitude of the impact decreased as the month progressed. Notably, restrictions mitigated cyclical expenditures.Conclusions
Policies to improve nutrition outcomes among SNAP participants should consider including targeted interventions in the second half of the month to address the benefit cycle and attendant nutrition outcomes.Trial registration
ClinicalTrial.gov, NCT02643576 . Retrospectively registered December 22, 2014.
SUBMITTER: Valluri S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8642917 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveSupplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits are rapidly depleted after distribution. This phenomenon, known as the benefit cycle, is associated with poor nutrition and health outcomes. However, to date, no study has evaluated trends in food expenditures before and after households receive benefits using prospective data, and whether these trends vary by household characteristics.DesignGeneralised estimating equations were used to model weekly household food expenditures during baseline (pre-benefit) and intervention months by vendor (restaurants and food retailers). Food retailer expenditures were further evaluated by food category (fruits and vegetables and foods high in added sugar). All expenditures were evaluated by household composition, demographics and economic means.SettingMinneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota, metropolitan area.ParticipantsLow-income households (n 249) enrolled May 2013-August 2015.ResultsWeekly food retailer expenditures did not vary during baseline (pre-benefit), but demonstrated a cyclical pattern after households received benefits across all household characteristics and for both food categories, particularly for fruits and vegetables. Households with greater economic resources spent more throughout the month compared with those with fewer resources. Households with lower food security status experienced more severe fluctuations in spending compared with more food secure households.ConclusionsCyclical food purchasing was observed broadly across different household characteristics and food categories, with notable differences by household economic means and food security status. Proposed SNAP policy changes designed to smooth food expenditures across the benefit month, such as increased frequency of benefit distribution, should include a focus on households with fewest resources.
| S-EPMC7855890 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceFood insecurity is associated with high health care expenditures, but the effectiveness of food insecurity interventions on health care costs is unknown.ObjectiveTo determine whether the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which addresses food insecurity, can reduce health care expenditures.Design, setting, and participantsThis is a retrospective cohort study of 4447 noninstitutionalized adults with income below 200% of the federal poverty threshold who participated in the 2011 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) and the 2012-2013 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS).ExposuresSelf-reported SNAP participation in 2011.Main outcomes and measuresTotal health care expenditures (all paid claims and out-of-pocket costs) in the 2012-2013 period. To test whether SNAP participation was associated with lower subsequent health care expenditures, we used generalized linear modeling (gamma distribution, log link, with survey design information), adjusting for demographics (age, gender, race/ethnicity), socioeconomic factors (income, education, Social Security Disability Insurance disability, urban/rural), census region, health insurance, and self-reported medical conditions. We also conducted sensitivity analyses as a robustness check for these modeling assumptions.ResultsA total of 4447 participants (2567 women and 1880 men) were enrolled in the study, mean (SE) age, 42.7 (0.5) years; 1889 were SNAP participants, and 2558 were not. Compared with other low-income adults, SNAP participants were younger (mean [SE] age, 40.3 [0.6] vs 44.1 [0.7] years), more likely to have public insurance or be uninsured (84.9% vs 67.7%), and more likely to be disabled (24.2% vs 10.6%) (P?<?.001 for all). In age- and gender-adjusted models, health care expenditures between those who did and did not participate in SNAP were similar (difference, $34; 95% CI, -$1097 to $1165). In fully adjusted models, SNAP was associated with lower estimated annual health care expenditures (-$1409; 95% CI, -$2694 to -$125). Sensitivity analyses were consistent with these results, also indicating that SNAP participation was associated with significantly lower estimated expenditures.Conclusions and relevanceSNAP enrollment is associated with reduced health care spending among low-income American adults, a finding consistent across several analytic approaches. Encouraging SNAP enrollment among eligible adults may help reduce health care costs in the United States.
| S-EPMC5710268 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits are rapidly depleted after distribution. This phenomenon, known as the benefit cycle, is associated with poor nutrition and health outcomes. Proposed interventions targeting the benefit cycle often focus on impulsive decision-making. However, it remains unclear whether shopper impulsivity is associated with food purchasing behavior. Using data from a prospective trial, we evaluate whether shopper impulsivity is associated with food purchasing behavior before and after households receive nutrition assistance. In this study, 249 low-income households in the Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota, metropolitan area received monthly benefits for three months. Overall impulsivity and impulsivity subtraits of the primary shopper was assessed using the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale-11. Both total food expenditures and expenditures for two specific categories (fruits and vegetables, and foods high in added sugar) were evaluated. Generalized estimating equations were used to model household expenditures as a function of week since benefit distribution, impulsivity, and their interaction. Results showed that during the benefit period, food expenditures were cyclical and patterned by impulsivity. Shoppers with greater overall impulsivity spent $40.62 more in week 1 (p < 0.001). While more impulsive shoppers spent more on foods high in added sugar throughout the month (p < 0.05 for all weeks), no patterns were observed for fruits and vegetables. These findings suggest that greater impulsivity exacerbates cyclical food purchasing behavior. The impact of shopper impulsivity is especially notable for expenditures on foods high in added sugar. SNAP educational interventions to mitigate the benefit cycle may be strengthened by focusing on more impulsive shoppers and on strategies to reduce impulsive purchases of foods high in added sugar.
| S-EPMC8137649 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) provides approximately US$70 billion annually to support food purchases by low-income households, supporting approximately 1 in 7 Americans. In the 2018 Farm Bill, potential SNAP revisions to improve diets and health could include financial incentives, disincentives, or restrictions for certain foods. However, the overall and comparative impacts on health outcomes and costs are not established. We aimed to estimate the health impact, program and healthcare costs, and cost-effectiveness of food incentives, disincentives, or restrictions in SNAP.Methods and findingsWe used a validated microsimulation model (CVD-PREDICT), populated with national data on adult SNAP participants from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2009-2014, policy effects from SNAP pilots and food pricing meta-analyses, diet-disease effects from meta-analyses, and policy, food, and healthcare costs from published literature to estimate the overall and comparative impacts of 3 dietary policy interventions: (1) a 30% incentive for fruits and vegetables (F&V), (2) a 30% F&V incentive with a restriction of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs), and (3) a broader incentive/disincentive program for multiple foods that also preserves choice (SNAP-plus), combining 30% incentives for F&V, nuts, whole grains, fish, and plant-based oils and 30% disincentives for SSBs, junk food, and processed meats. Among approximately 14.5 million adults on SNAP at baseline with mean age 52 years, our simulation estimates that the F&V incentive over 5 years would prevent 38,782 cardiovascular disease (CVD) events, gain 18,928 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and save $1.21 billion in healthcare costs. Adding SSB restriction increased gains to 93,933 CVD events prevented, 45,864 QALYs gained, and $4.33 billion saved. For SNAP-plus, corresponding gains were 116,875 CVD events prevented, 56,056 QALYs gained, and $5.28 billion saved. Over a lifetime, the F&V incentive would prevent approximately 303,900 CVD events, gain 649,000 QALYs, and save $6.77 billion in healthcare costs. Adding SSB restriction increased gains to approximately 797,900 CVD events prevented, 2.11 million QALYs gained, and $39.16 billion in healthcare costs saved. For SNAP-plus, corresponding gains were approximately 940,000 CVD events prevented, 2.47 million QALYs gained, and $41.93 billion saved. From a societal perspective (including programmatic costs but excluding food subsidy costs as an intra-societal transfer), all 3 scenarios were cost-saving. From a government affordability perspective (i.e., incorporating food subsidy costs, including for children and young adults for whom no health gains were modeled), the F&V incentive was of low cost-effectiveness at 5 years (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio: $548,053/QALY) but achieved cost-effectiveness ($66,525/QALY) over a lifetime. Adding SSB restriction, the intervention was cost-effective at 10 years ($68,857/QALY) and very cost-effective at 20 years ($26,435/QALY) and over a lifetime ($5,216/QALY). The combined incentive/disincentive program produced the largest health gains and reduced both healthcare and food costs, with net cost-savings of $10.16 billion at 5 years and $63.33 billion over a lifetime. Results were consistent in probabilistic sensitivity analyses: for example, from a societal perspective, 1,000 of 1,000 iterations (100%) were cost-saving for all 3 interventions. Due to the nature of simulation studies, the findings cannot prove the health and cost impacts of national SNAP interventions.ConclusionsLeveraging healthier eating through SNAP could generate substantial health benefits and be cost-effective or cost-saving. A combined food incentive/disincentive program appears most effective and may be most attractive to policy-makers.
| S-EPMC6168180 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC5820777 | biostudies-literature
Project description:One in seven Americans participates in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), making it the largest federally funded food assistance program. SNAP benefits are distributed once per month and both food spending and calorie consumption tend to decrease as time from benefit distribution increases. The monthly SNAP benefit cycle has serious implications for the health and financial stability of low-income families, a growing number of whom rely on SNAP as their sole source of income. Relatively little is known about the specific coping strategies households use to manage the SNAP cycle. The purpose of this study is to provide a critical exploration of the nature and timing of coping strategies for managing the SNAP cycle, including implications these coping mechanisms have for health and financial stability. This paper presents data from a prospective cohort study of mothers (n?=?12) receiving SNAP benefits in Philadelphia between 2016 and 17. Both in-depth qualitative and survey methods were used. Participants reported on a variety of coping strategies they used to manage the SNAP cycle, including adjustments to shopping and eating patterns, mental accounting, emotional resilience, and social support. Instrumental social support was particularly vital in the final days of the benefit cycle, as were skipping meals and purchasing less expensive, energy-dense foods. Constant vigilance was required throughout the month to manage financial instability. The coping strategies for managing the SNAP cycle have short-term benefits, such as buffering against hunger and financial instability, however these survival strategies may have negative long-term repercussions for physical and financial health.
| S-EPMC6468142 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) increases the food purchasing power of its clients by distribution of monthly benefits. The goal of this study was to determine if food expenditure patterns of SNAP households meet the Thrifty Food Plan (TFP) recommendations. Results indicated that greater TFP-adjusted total grocery expenditure was significantly associated with greater spending on low fat dairy, vegetables, whole grains and fruits relative to the recommendations. Future research could focus on psychosocial factors associated with inadequate grocery spending among SNAP households.
| S-EPMC6519734 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A 2009 Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) policy change that expanded eligibility and increased benefit amounts has been associated with reduced food insecurity. This study tests the hypothesis that the SNAP policy change corresponds with improved stress- and nutrition-sensitive cardiometabolic markers. This study included non-pregnant participants aged 18-59 with annual family incomes ≤185% of the federal poverty guideline from the repeated cross-sectional NHANES study. Those living in SNAP eligible households (income ≤130% of the poverty guideline) were compared to those who were likely non-eligible (income 131%-≤185%). Difference-in-differences analyses compared hemoglobin A1c (%), CRP (mg/dL), total cholesterol (mg/dL), LDL (mg/dL) and waist circumference (cm) across groups before (2007-2008) and after (2009-2010) the SNAP policy change. Sampling weights were applied. Adjusting for demographic, socioeconomic, household and health factors, there were statistically significant difference-in-differences estimates for hemoglobin A1c (p = 0.003, n = 3723) and total cholesterol (p = 0.028, n = 3710). SNAP eligible adults had no difference in hemoglobin A1c after the policy change and, among those less than 40 years of age, 5 mg/dL lower total cholesterol levels whereas likely non-SNAP eligible adults had 0.14% higher hemoglobin A1c and no difference in total cholesterol after the policy change. The 2009 SNAP expansion was associated with improved nutrition-sensitive cardiometabolic markers in SNAP-eligible adults. This study found less of an upward trend in hemoglobin A1c levels for young and middle aged adults and decreased total cholesterol for young adults. These results highlight the potential role of SNAP to prevent costly chronic conditions among low-income U.S. adults.
| S-EPMC8316430 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC7748149 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionObesity is a major public health challenge and exacerbates economic disparities through employment discrimination and increased personal health expenditures. Financial incentives for weight management may intensify individuals' utilisation of evidence-based behavioural strategies while addressing obesity-related economic disparities in low-income populations. Trials have focused on testing incentives contingent on achieving weight loss outcomes. However, based on social cognitive and self-determination theories, providing incentives for achieving intermediate behavioural goals may be more sustainable than incentivising outcomes if they enhance an individual's skills and self-efficacy for maintaining long-term weight loss. The objective of this paper is to describe the rationale and design of the Financial Incentives foR Weight Reduction study, a randomised controlled trial to test the comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of two financial incentive strategies for weight loss (goal directed vs outcome based) among low-income adults with obesity, as well as compared with the provision of health behaviour change resources alone.Methods and analysisWe are recruiting 795 adults, aged 18-70 years with a body mass index ≥30 kg/m2, from three primary care clinics serving residents of socioeconomically disadvantaged neighbourhoods in New York City and Los Angeles. All participants receive a 1-year commercial weight loss programme membership, self-monitoring tools (bathroom scale, food journal and Fitbit Alta HR), health education and monthly check-in visits. In addition to these resources, those in the two intervention groups can earn up to $750 over 6 months for: (1) participating in an intensive weight management programme, self-monitoring weight and diet and meeting physical activity guidelines (goal-directed arm); or (2) a ≥1.5% to ≥5% reduction in baseline weight (outcome-based arm). To maximise incentive efficacy, we incorporate concepts from behavioural economics, including immediacy of payments and framing feedback to elicit regret aversion. We will use generalised mixed effect models for repeated measures to examine intervention effects on weight at 6, 9 and 12 months.Ethics and disseminationHuman research protection committees at New York University School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) David Geffen School of Medicine and Olive-View-UCLA Medical Center granted ethics approval. We will disseminate the results of this research via peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and meetings with stakeholders.Trial registration numberNCT03157713.
| S-EPMC6500238 | biostudies-literature