Pragmatic Return to Effective Dental Infection Control through Triage and Testing (PREDICT): an observational, feasibility study to improve dental office safety.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a substantial interruption of care, with patients and workers fearful to return to the dental office. As dental practice creates a highly aerosolized environment, the potential for spread of airborne illness is magnified. As a means to increase safety and mitigate risk, pre-visit testing for SARS-CoV-2 has the potential to minimize disease transmission in dental offices. The Pragmatic Return to Effective Dental Infection Control through Testing (PREDICT) Feasibility Study examined the logistics and impact of two different testing mechanisms (laboratory-based PCR viral testing and point-of-care antigen testing) in dental offices. METHODS: Dental healthcare workers (DHCWs) and patients in four dental offices within the National Dental Practice-based Research Network participated in this prospective study. In addition to electronic surveys, participants in two offices completed POC testing, while participants in two offices used lab-based PCR methods to detect SARS-CoV-2 infection. Analysis was limited to descriptive measures, with median and interquartile ranges reported for Likert scale responses and mean and standard deviation for continuous variables. RESULTS: Of the total 72 enrolled, 28 DHCWs and 41 patients completed the protocol. Two patients (4.9%) tested positive prior to their visit, while 2 DHCWs (12.5%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection at the start of the study. DHCWs and patients shared similar degree of concern (69% and 63%, respectively) for contracting COVID-19 from patients, while patients feared contracting COVID-19 from DHCWs less (49%). Descriptive statistics calculations revealed that saliva, tongue epithelial cells, and nasal swabs were the most desirable specimen collection method; both testing (LAB and POC) protocols took similar amounts of total time to complete; and DHCWs and patients reported feeling more comfortable when both groups were tested. CONCLUSIONS: While a larger-scale, network study is necessary for generalizability of results, this feasibility study suggests that SARS-CoV-2 testing can be effectively implemented into dental practice workflows and positively impact perception of safety for DHCWs and patients. As new virulent infectious diseases emerge, preparing dental personnel to employ an entire toolbox of risk mitigation strategies, including testing, may have the potential to decrease dental practice closure time, maintaining continuity of dental care services for patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05123742.

Pragmatic Return to Effective Dental Infection Control through Triage and Testing (PREDICT): A feasibility study to improve dental office safety.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic highlights the need for practitioners to enhance workflows to increase safety and mitigate risk. As dental practice creates a highly aerosolized environment, pre-visit testing for SARS-CoV-2 has the potential to be an effective mitigation strategy to minimize disease transmission in dental offices. The Pragmatic Return to Effective Dental Infection Control through Testing (PREDICT) Feasibility Study examined the potential, logistics, and impact related to laboratory-based PCR viral testing and point-of-care (POC) antigen testing. Methods: Dental healthcare workers (DHCWs) and patients in four dental offices within the National Dental Practice-based Research Network participated in this prospective study. In addition to electronic surveys, participants in two offices completed POC testing, while participants in two offices used lab based PCR methods to detect SARS-CoV-2 infection. For this feasibility study, analysis was limited to descriptive measures. Median and interquartile ranges were reported for Likert scale responses and mean and standard deviation for continuous variables. Results: Forty-one of forty-three consented patients and twenty-eight of twenty-nine DHCWs completed the protocol. Descriptive statistics calculations including median and interquartile ranges revealed (1) saliva, tongue epithelial cells and nasal swabs were the most desirable specimens for testing for groups (2) both LAB and POC protocols took similar amounts of total time to complete the full testing protocol and (3) DHCWs and patients reported feeling more comfortable when both groups were tested. Conclusions: This feasibility study suggests that pre-visit SARS-CoV-2 testing can be effectively implemented into dental practice workflows and positively impact perception of safety for DHCWs and patients, though a larger scale, network study is necessary for generalizability of results. As new virulent infectious diseases continue to emerge, preparing dental personnel to employ an entire toolbox of risk mitigation strategies, including testing, may have the potential to decrease dental practice closure time, maintaining continuity of dental care services for patients. Trial registration: This trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05123742.

Assessment of Calories Purchased After Calorie Labeling of Prepared Foods in a Large Supermarket Chain.

Importance: Calorie labels for prepared (ie, ready-to-eat) foods are required in large chain food establishments in the US. Large evaluations in restaurants suggest small declines in purchases of prepared foods after labeling, but to the authors' knowledge, no studies have examined how this policy influences supermarket purchases. Objective: To estimate changes in calories purchased from prepared foods and potential packaged substitutes compared with control foods after calorie labeling of prepared foods in supermarkets. Design, Setting, and Participants: This controlled interrupted time series compared sales 2 years before labeling implementation (April 2015-April 2017) with sales 7 months after labeling implementation (May 2017-December 2017). Data from 173 supermarkets from a supermarket chain with locations in Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, and Vermont were analyzed from March 2020 to May 2022. Intervention: Implementation of calorie labeling of prepared foods in April 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures: Purchased items were classified as prepared foods, potential packaged substitutes for prepared foods, or all other (ie, control) foods. The primary outcome was mean weekly calories per transaction purchased from prepared foods, and the secondary outcome was mean weekly calories per transaction purchased from similar packaged items (for substitution analyses). Analyses of prepared and packaged foods were stratified by food category (bakery, entrées and sides, or deli meats and cheeses). Results: Among the included 173 supermarkets, calorie labeling was associated with a mean 5.1% decrease (95% CI, -5.8% to -4.4%) in calories per transaction purchased from prepared bakery items and an 11.0% decrease (95% CI, -11.9% to -10.1%) from prepared deli items, adjusted for changes in control foods; no changes were observed for prepared entrées and sides (change = 0.3%; 95% CI, -2.5% to 3.0%). Labeling was also associated with decreased calories per transaction purchased from packaged bakery items (change = -3.9%; 95% CI, -4.3% to -3.6%), packaged entrées and sides (change = -1.2%; 95% CI, -1.4% to -0.9%), and packaged deli items (change = -2.1%; 95% CI, -2.4% to -1.7%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this longitudinal study of supermarkets, calorie labeling of prepared foods was associated with small to moderate decreases in calories purchased from prepared bakery and deli items without evidence of substitution to similar packaged foods.

Calorie Labeling and Product Reformulation: A Longitudinal Analysis of Supermarket-Prepared Foods.

INTRODUCTION: The 2010 Affordable Care Act required chain retail food establishments, including supermarkets, to post calorie information for prepared (i.e., ready to eat) foods. Implementation of calorie labeling could spur companies to reduce the calorie content of prepared foods, but few studies have explored this. This study evaluates the changes in the calorie content of prepared foods at 2 large U.S. supermarket chains after they implemented calorie labels in April 2017. METHODS: The chains (≈1,200 stores) provided data on the calorie content and labeling status of all items sold between July 2015 and January 2019. In 2021, analyses used a difference-in-differences approach to examine the changes in the calorie content of prepared bakery, entree, and deli items introduced before calorie labeling to those introduced after the labeling compared with changes in similar foods not subject to the new labeling requirement. Primary analyses examined continuously available items; exploratory analyses examined items newly introduced to the marketplace. RESULTS: Relative to changes in comparison foods not subject to the labeling requirement, continuously available prepared bakery items decreased by 7.7 calories per item after calorie labels were implemented (95% CI= -12.9, -2.5, p=0.004, ≈0.5% reduction). In exploratory analyses, prepared bakery items introduced after calorie labeling contained 440 fewer calories per item than those introduced before calorie labeling (95% CI= -773.9, -106.1, p=0.01, ≈27% reduction), driven by reductions in product size. No changes were observed in the calorie content of continuously available or newly introduced prepared entrees or deli items. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing calorie labels could encourage product reformulation among some types of prepared supermarket foods. These supply-side changes could lead to reductions in caloric intake.

Comparing Online and In-Store Grocery Purchases.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the grocery shopping patterns of people who shopped both online and in-store and evaluate whether shoppers purchased fewer unhealthy, impulse-sensitive items online. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of 44 weeks of grocery transaction data collected for fruit and vegetable incentive trials in 2 Maine supermarkets. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 137 primary household shoppers who shopped at least once in-store and online (curbside pickup) for 5,573 total transactions MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES AND ANALYSIS: Paired t tests and descriptive analyses compared online and in-store transactions with respect to frequency, total spending, number of items purchased, and spending on 10 food groups and 34 subgroups. Mixed-effects regression models estimated differences in online vs in-store spending on 5 unhealthy, impulse-sensitive subgroups. RESULTS: When shopping online, participants spent 44% more per transaction ($113.58 vs $78.88, P < 0.001) and purchased more items (38.3 vs 26.6 items/transaction, P < 0.001). Compared with in-store, shopping online was associated with reduced spending per transaction on candy (-$0.65, P < 0.001), cold or frozen desserts (-$0.52, P < 0.001), and grain-based desserts (-$1.29, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Online shopping was associated with lower spending on certain unhealthy, impulse-sensitive foods. Grocery-based healthy eating initiatives might leverage online ordering platforms to increase their reach and effectiveness.

Comparing shopper characteristics by online grocery ordering use among households in low-income communities in Maine.

OBJECTIVE: Online grocery shopping could improve access to healthy food, but it may not be equally accessible to all populations - especially those at higher risk for food insecurity. The current study aimed to compare the socio-demographic characteristics of families who ordered groceries online v. those who only shopped in-store. DESIGN: We analysed enrollment survey and 44 weeks of individually linked grocery transaction data. We used univariate χ2 and t-tests and logistic regression to assess differences in socio-demographic characteristics between households that only shopped in-store and those that shopped online with curbside pickup (online only or online and in-store). SETTING: Two Maine supermarkets. PARTICIPANTS: 863 parents or caregivers of children under 18 years old enrolled in two fruit and vegetable incentive trials. RESULTS: Participants had a total of 32 757 transactions. In univariate assessments, online shoppers had higher incomes (P < 0 0001), were less likely to participate in Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children or Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP; P < 0 0001) and were more likely to be female (P = 0·04). Most online shoppers were 30-39 years old, and few were 50 years or older (P = 0·003). After controlling for age, gender, race/ethnicity, number of children, number of adults, income and SNAP participation, female primary shoppers (OR = 2·75, P = 0·003), number of children (OR = 1·27, P = 0·04) and income (OR = 3·91 for 186-300 % federal poverty line (FPL) and OR = 6·92 for >300 % FPL, P < 0·0001) were significantly associated with likelihood of shopping online. CONCLUSIONS: In the current study of Maine families, low-income shoppers were significantly less likely to utilise online grocery ordering with curbside pickup. Future studies could focus on elucidating barriers and developing strategies to improve access.

Supermarket Purchases Over the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Benefit Month: A Comparison Between Participants and Nonparticipants.

INTRODUCTION: The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program provides financial assistance for food and beverage purchases to approximately 1 in 7 Americans, with benefits distributed once monthly. Most Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits are spent early in the month, leading to decreased caloric intake later in the month. The effects of this early benefit depletion on the types of foods and beverages purchased over the course of the month is unclear. METHODS: Using individually tracked sales data from 950 participants enrolled in 2 supermarket-based RCTs in Maine (October 2015-April 2016 and October 2016-June 2017), purchases of selected food categories by Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program participants (n=248) versus nonparticipants (n=702) in the first 2 weeks compared with the last 2 weeks of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefit month were examined. Analyses were completed in 2019. RESULTS: For Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program participants, adjusted mean food spending decreased 37% from the first 2 weeks to the last 2 weeks of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefit month (p<0.0001) compared with a 3% decrease (p=0.02) for nonparticipants. The decline in spending by Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program participants occurred in all examined categories: vegetables (-25%), fruits (-27%), sugar-sweetened beverages (-30%), red meat (-37%), convenience foods (-40%), and poultry (-48%). Difference-in-difference estimators comparing Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program participants with nonparticipants were statistically significant (p<0.05) for all examined categories. CONCLUSIONS: In the second half of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefit month, individuals reduced purchases of all examined categories. More research is needed to understand the impact of these fluctuations in spending patterns on the dietary quality of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program participants.

Financial Incentives Increase Purchases Of Fruit And Vegetables Among Lower-Income Households With Children.

The high cost of fruit and vegetables can be a barrier to healthy eating, particularly among lower-income households with children. We examined the effects of a financial incentive on purchases at a single supermarket by primary shoppers from low-income households who had at least one child. Participation in an in-store Cooking Matters event was requested for incentivized subjects but optional for their nonincentivized controls. The sample included but was not limited to Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program participants. Compared to the controls, incentivized shoppers-who were given an immediate 50 percent discount on qualifying fruit and vegetables-increased weekly spending on those items by 27 percent; this change was for fresh produce. There was no change in purchases of frozen and canned produce or unhealthful foods. Estimated annual average daily consumption of fruit and vegetables by the incentivized shoppers and by one designated child per incentivized household did not change. Attendance at Cooking Matters events was low. These findings support financial incentive programs to increase fruit and vegetable purchasing but suggest that effective complementary approaches are needed to improve diet quality.

Make It Fresh, for Less! A Supermarket Meal Bundling and Electronic Reminder Intervention to Promote Healthy Purchases Among Families With Children.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of a supermarket meal bundling and electronic reminder intervention on food choices of families with children. DESIGN: Quasi-experimental (meal bundling) and randomized, controlled trial (electronic reminders). SETTING: Large supermarket in Maine during 40-week baseline and 16-week intervention periods in 2015-2016. PARTICIPANTS: English-speaking adults living with at least 1 child aged ≤18 years (n = 300) with 25% of households participating in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. INTERVENTION(S): (1) Four bundles of ingredients needed to make 8 low-cost healthful meals were promoted in the store through displays and point-of-purchase messaging for 4 weeks each; (2) weekly electronic messages based on principles from behavioral psychology were sent to study participants reminding them to look for meal bundles in the store. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: (1) Difference in storewide sales and individual purchases of bundled items (measured using supermarket loyalty card data) from baseline to intervention in intervention vs control groups. ANALYSIS: Regressions controlling for total food spending and accounting for repeated measures. RESULTS: There were no differences in spending on bundled items resulting from the meal bundling intervention or the electronic reminders. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Overall, there was little impact of healthful meal bundles and electronic reminders on storewide sales or purchases of promoted items in a large supermarket.

A Supermarket Double-Dollar Incentive Program Increases Purchases of Fresh Fruits and Vegetables Among Low-Income Families With Children: The Healthy Double Study.

OBJECTIVE: To carry out a pilot study to determine whether a supermarket double-dollar fruit and vegetable (F&V) incentive increases F&V purchases among low-income families. DESIGN: Randomized controlled design. Purchases were tracked using a loyalty card that provided participants with a 5% discount on all purchases during a 3-month baseline period followed by the 4-month intervention. SETTING: A supermarket in a low-income rural Maine community. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 401 low-income and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) supermarket customers. INTERVENTION: Same-day coupon at checkout for half-off eligible fresh, frozen, or canned F&V over 4 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Weekly spending in dollars on eligible F&V. ANALYSIS: A linear model with random intercepts accounted for repeated transactions by individuals to estimate change in F&V spending per week from baseline to intervention. Secondary analyses examined changes among SNAP-eligible participants. RESULTS: Coupons were redeemed among 53% of eligible baskets. Total weekly F&V spending increased in the intervention arm compared with control ($1.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], $0.29 to $3.88). The largest increase was for fresh F&V ($1.97; 95% CI, $0.49 to $3.44). Secondary analyses revealed greater increases in F&V spending among SNAP-eligible participants who redeemed coupons ($5.14; 95% CI, $1.93 to $8.34) than among non-SNAP eligible participants who redeemed coupons ($3.88; 95% CI, $1.67 to $6.08). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: A double-dollar pricing incentive increased F&V spending in a low-income community despite the moderate uptake of the coupon redemption. Customers who were eligible for SNAP saw the greatest F&V spending increases. Financial incentives for F&V are an effective strategy for food assistance programs to increase healthy purchases and improve dietary intake in low-income families.

Transactions at a Northeastern Supermarket Chain: Differences by Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Use.

INTRODUCTION: Although one in seven Americans receives Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits, little is known about how these benefits for food are spent because individual-level sales data are not publicly available. The purpose of this study is to compare transactions made with and without SNAP benefits at a large regional supermarket chain. METHODS: Sales data were obtained from a large supermarket chain in the Northeastern U.S. for a period of 2 years (April 2012-April 2014). Multivariate multiple regression models were used to quantify relative differences in dollars spent on 31 predefined SNAP-eligible food categories. Analyses were completed in 2016. RESULTS: Transactions with SNAP benefit use included higher spending on less healthful food categories, including sugar-sweetened beverages ($1.08), red meat ($1.55), and convenience foods ($1.34), and lower spending on more healthful food categories, such as fruits (-$1.51), vegetables (-$1.35), and poultry (-$1.25) compared to transactions without SNAP benefit use. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide objective data to compare purchases made with and without SNAP benefits. Next steps should be to test proposed SNAP modifications to determine whether they would have the intended effect of promoting healthier purchasing patterns among SNAP beneficiaries.

Exploring the unanticipated effects of multi-sectoral partnerships in chronic disease prevention.

Multi-sectoral partnerships are important parts of many public health efforts to address chronic diseases, such as cancer, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease. Despite the potential value of multi-sectoral approaches, uncertainty exists regarding their effects on individuals, organizations, communities and populations. This article reports on a study that examined the unanticipated effects (both positive and negative) of the Public Health Agency of Canada's (the Agency) Multi-sectoral Partnerships initiative, which supports more than 30 multi-sectoral partnership projects across Canada. Thirteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with staff from organizations participating in 3 diverse partnership projects as part of the Agency's multi-sectoral partnerships initiative. Multiple unanticipated effects were identified and organized into 4 themes: (1) insights about the flexibility and responsiveness of government; (2) access to new and valuable resources (people, skills, expertise); (3) opportunity to build new capacities; and (4) understanding realistic timelines for partnership activities and outcomes. While these effects were unanticipated for study participants, they resonate with insights from the literature on multi-sectoral partnerships. These results raise a number of questions for consideration as partnership initiatives continue to evolve, including the types of training that partners might need; the individual and organizational capacities required for partnership approaches; and the evaluation techniques that might be most useful to capture the non-linear effects of partnership approaches.

Evaluation of a peer-led self-management education programme PEP Talk: Diabetes, Healthy Feet and You.

PEP (Peer Education Programme) Talk: Diabetes, Healthy Feet and You is a peer-led self-management programme developed to address the problems of growing prevalence of diabetes and its complications, and limited health care dollars. An evaluation of the programme, how it might be situated within a public health perspective and potential bridges for its implementation in communities throughout Canada and worldwide, are presented. The programme consisted of workshops that were conducted by volunteer peer leaders and health care professionals in 12 communities in 10 Canadian provinces; the volunteers were supported through monthly mentoring teleconferences, on-line tips and discussion board conversations. A web portal was developed to be used by the team, volunteers and community participants. Workshop curriculum was developed based on diabetes footcare and self-management best practise guidelines. Community participants answered pre-and post-workshop statements that indicated that learning occurred, as indicated by an increase in the number of statements answered correctly. Participants' feedback about the workshops was positive. In telephone follow-up interviews, 97% of respondents reported having changed their foot self-management behaviours. The portal was commonly used according to website visits, but not as much as expected for registration of community participants. It is recommended that this programme be made widely available and tailored to the specific needs of the communities and that further evaluation be conducted.