Can food vouchers improve nutrition and reduce health inequalities in low-income mothers and young children: a multi-method evaluation of the experiences of beneficiaries and practitioners of the Healthy Start programme in England

BMC Public Health

Mary J Renfrew¹  Julia Fox-Rushby⁴  Felicia McCormick²  Jenny McLeish³  Victoria Williams⁵  Josephine M Green²  Alison McFadden⁶ 

[1] College of Medicine, Dentistry and Nursing, University of Dundee, 11 Arlie Place, Dundee DD1 4HJ, UK;Department of Health Sciences, University of York, Heslington, York YO10 5DD, UK;4 Claremont Road, Tunbridge Wells, Kent TN1 1SZ, UK;Health Economics Research Group (HERG), Brunel University, Uxbridge, Middlesex UB8 3PH, UK;Food Matters, Brighthelm Centre, North Road, Brighton BN1 1YD, UK;Research Fellow, College of Medicine, Dentistry and Nursing, University of Dundee, 11 Arlie Place, Dundee DD1 4HJ, UK

关键词: Nutritional inequalities;    Fruit and vegetable intake;    Maternal and young child nutrition;    Low-income families;    Healthy Start;    Food vouchers;    Food subsidy programme;   

Others  :  1145359
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2458-14-148

 received in 2013-10-17, accepted in 2014-02-06,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Good nutrition is important during pregnancy, breastfeeding and early life to optimise the health of women and children. It is difficult for low-income families to prioritise spending on healthy food. Healthy Start is a targeted United Kingdom (UK) food subsidy programme that gives vouchers for fruit, vegetables, milk, and vitamins to low-income families. This paper reports an evaluation of Healthy Start from the perspectives of women and health practitioners.

Methods

The multi-method study conducted in England in 2011/2012 included focus group discussions with 49 health practitioners, an online consultation with 620 health and social care practitioners, service managers, commissioners, and user and advocacy groups, and qualitative participatory workshops with 85 low-income women. Additional focus group discussions and telephone interviews included the views of 25 women who did not speak English and three women from Traveller communities.

Results

Women reported that Healthy Start vouchers increased the quantity and range of fruit and vegetables they used and improved the quality of family diets, and established good habits for the future. Barriers to registration included complex eligibility criteria, inappropriate targeting of information about the programme by health practitioners and a general low level of awareness among families. Access to the programme was particularly challenging for women who did not speak English, had low literacy levels, were in low paid work or had fluctuating incomes. The potential impact was undermined by the rising price of food relative to voucher value. Access to registered retailers was problematic in rural areas, and there was low registration among smaller shops and market stalls, especially those serving culturally diverse communities.

Conclusions

Our evaluation of the Healthy Start programme in England suggests that a food subsidy programme can provide an important nutritional safety net and potentially improve nutrition for pregnant women and young children living on low incomes. Factors that could compromise this impact include erosion of voucher value relative to the rising cost of food, lack of access to registered retailers and barriers to registering for the programme. Addressing these issues could inform the design and implementation of food subsidy programmes in high income countries.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 McFadden et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Baker EA, Schootman M, Barnidge E, Kelly C: The role of race and poverty in access to foods that enable individuals to adhere to dietary guidelines. Prev Chronic Dis 2006, 3(3):A76.
• [2]Anderson A: Nutrition interventions in women in low-income groups in the UK. Proc Nutr Soc 2007, 66:25-32.
• [3]Dowler EA, O’Connor D: Rights-based approaches to addressing food poverty and food insecurity in Ireland and UK. Soc Sci Med 2012, 74(1):44-51.
• [4]Rayner M, Scarborough P: The burden of food related ill health in the UK. J Epidemiol Community Health 2005, 59(12):1054-1057.
• [5]Black AP, Brimblecombe J, Eyles H, Morris P, Vally H, O’Dea K: Food subsidy programs and the health and nutritional status of disadvantaged families in high income countries: a systematic review. BMC Public Health 2012, 12:1099. BioMed Central Full Text
• [6]Nelson M, Ehrens B, Bates B, Church S, Boshier T: Low income diet and nutrition survey. executive summary. London: The Stationery Office; 2007.
• [7]Giskes K, Turrell G, Patterson C, Newman B: Socio-economic differences in fruit and vegetable consumption among Australian adolescents and adults. Public Health Nutr 2002, 5(5):663-670.
• [8]Irala-Estevez JD, Groth M, Johansson L, Oltersdorf U, Prattala R, Martinez-Gonzalez MA: A systematic review of socio-economic differences in food habits in Europe: consumption of fruit and vegetables. Eur J Clin Nutr 2000, 54(9):706-714.
• [9]Kamphuis C, Giskes K, de Bruijn G-J, Wendel-Vos W, Brug J, Van Lenthe FJ: Environmental determinants of fruit and vegetable consumption among adults: a systematic review. Br J Nutr 2006, 96(04):620-635.
• [10]Bihan H, Castetbon K, Mejean C, Peneau S, Pelabon L, Jellouli F, Le Clesiau H, Hercberg S: Sociodemographic factors and attitudes toward food affordability and health are associated with fruit and vegetable consumption in a low-income French population. J Nutr 2010, 140(4):823-830.
• [11]Attree P: A critical analysis of UK public health policies in relation to diet and nutrition in low-income households. Matern Child Nutr 2006, 2(2):67-78.
• [12]Symonds M, Ramsay M: Maternal-fetal nutrition during pregnancy and lactation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2010.
• [13]Ramakrishnan U, Grant F, Goldenberg T, Zongrone A, Martorell R: Effect of women’s nutrition before and during early pregnancy on maternal and infant outcomes: a systematic review. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 2012, 26(Supplement 1):285-301.
• [14]Marmot MG, Allen J, Goldblatt P, Boyce T, McNeish D, Grady M, Geddes I, on behalf of the Marmot Review: Fair society, healthy lives: strategic review of health inequalities in England post-2010. London: The Marmot Review; 2010.
• [15]Dowler E, Caraher M, Lincoln P: Inequalities in food and nutrition: challenging ‘lifestyles’. In Challenging health inequalities: from Acheson to ‘choosing health’. Edited by Dowler E, Spencer N. Bristol: The Policy Press; 2007:127-155.
• [16]Department of Environment Food and Rural Affairs: Family food 2011. London: Department of Environment Food and Rural Affairs; 2012.
• [17]Department of Environment Food and Rural Affairs: Food statistics pocketbook 2013. London: Department of Environment Food and Rural Affairs; 2013.
• [18]Padley M, Hirsch D: Households below a minimum income standard: 2008/09 to 2010/11. Joseph Rowntree Foundation: York, UK; 2013.
• [19]Gordon D, Mack J, Lansley S, Main G, Nandy S, Patsios D, Pomati M, Poverty and Social Exclusion team from the University of Bristol, Heriot- Watt University, National Centre for Social Research, et al.: The impoverishment of the UK. Poverty and social exclusion UK first results: living standards. Bristol, UK: Poverty and Social Exclusion Unit; 2013.
• [20]Jobseeker’s allowance [https://www.gov.uk/jobseekers-allowance/what-youll-get webcite]
• [21]Dallison J, Lobstein T: Poor expectations: poverty and undernourishment in pregnancy. London: National Children’s Home Action for Children/ The Maternity Alliance; 1995.
• [22]Consumer price index & retail prices index reference tables, September 2012, table 14 [http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/cpi/consumer-price-indices/september-2012/stb---consumer-price-indices---september-2012.html webcite]
• [23]Office for National Statistics: Expenditure on food and non-alcoholic drinks by place of purchase, 2011; family spending. 2012 edition. Newport, South Wales: Office for National Statistics; 2012.
• [24]Benefits are changing [http://www.cafamily.org.uk/know-your-rights/benefits-and-tax-credits/forthcoming-benefit-changes/ webcite]
• [25]Hirsch D: A minimum income standard for the UK in 2013. Joseph Rowntree Foundation: York; 2013.
• [26]Green R, Cornelsen L, Dangour AD, Turner R, Shankar B, Mazzocchi M, Smith RD: The effect of rising food prices on food consumption: systematic review with meta-regression. Br Med J 2013, 346:f3703.
• [27]Oliveira V, Fraz~ao E: The WIC program: background, trends, and economic issues. 2009 edition. Washington, DC: US Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service; 2009.
• [28]Healthy start website [http://www.healthystart.nhs.uk webcite]
• [29]Healthy start [https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/healthy-start-scheme-research webcite]
• [30]Child benefit, child tax credit and working tax credit take-up rates 2010-11 [http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/statistics/fin-takeup-stats/cwtc-take-up.pdf webcite]
• [31]Ford FA, Mouratidou T, Wademan SE, Fraser RB: Effect of the introduction of ‘healthy start’ on dietary behaviour during and after pregnancy: early results from the ‘before and after’ Sheffield study. Br J Nutr 2009, 101(12):1828-1836.
• [32]Mouratidou T, Ford FA, Wademan SE, Fraser RB: Are the benefits of the ‘healthy start’ food support scheme sustained at three months postpartum? Results from the Sheffield ‘before and after’ study. Matern Child Nutr 2010, 6(4):347-357.
• [33]Salathe LE: The food stamp program and low-income households’ food purchases. Agric Econ Res 1980, 32(4):33-41.
• [34]Reed AJ, Levedahl JW: Food stamps and the market demand for food. Am J Agric Econ 2010, 92(5):1392-1400.
• [35]Huang C, Fletcher S, Raunikar R: Modeling the effects of the food stamp program on participating households’ purchases: an empirical application. South J Agric Econ 1981, 13(2):21-28.
• [36]Kaushal N, Gao Q: Food stamp program and consumption choices. In Economic aspects of obesity. Edited by Grossman M, Mocan N. Chicago: National Bureau of Economic Research and University of Chicago Press; 2011:223-247.
• [37]Lanfranco BA, Ames GC, Huang CL, Stegelin F: WIC and the demand for food by the Hispanic community in the United States. J Food Distribution Res 2001, 32(1):85-96.
• [38]Arcia GJ, Crouch LA, Kulka RA: Impact of the WIC program on food expenditures. Am J Agric Econ 1990, 72(1):218-226.
• [39]Rychetnik L, Frommer M, Hawe P, Shiell A: Criteria for evaluating evidence on public health interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health 2002, 56(2):119-127.
• [40]Black MM, Hurley KM, Oberlander SE, Hager ER, McGill AE, White NT, Quigg AM: Participants’ comments on changes in the revised special supplemental nutrition program for women, infants, and children food packages: the Maryland food preference study. J Am Diet Assoc 2009, 109(1):116-123.
• [41]Stevens CA: Exploring food insecurity among young mothers (15-24 years). J Spec Pediatr Nurs 2010, 15(2):163-171.
• [42]Holmes AV, Chin NP, Kaczorowski J, Howard CR: A barrier to exclusive breastfeeding for WIC enrollees: limited use of exclusive breastfeeding food package for mothers. Breastfeed Med 2009, 4(1):25-30.
• [43]Hills D, Child C, Junge K, Wilkinson E, Sullivan F: Healthy start: rapid evaluation of early impact on recipients, health professionals, retailers and contractors. London: Symbia, Tavistock Institute; 2006.
• [44]Dyson L, Renfrew MJ, McFadden A, McCormick F, Herbert G, Thomas J: Promotion of breastfeeding initiation and duration. Evidence into practice briefing. London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence; 2006.
• [45]Renfrew MJ, Dyson L, Herbert G, McFadden A, McCormick F, Thomas J, Spiby H: Developing evidence-based recommendations in public health–incorporating the views of practitioners, service users and user representatives. Health Expect 2008, 11(1):3-15.
• [46]Hanley B, Bradburn J, Barnes M, Evans C, Goodare H, Kelson M: Involving the public in National Health Service public health and social care research: briefing notes for researchers (second edition). INVOLVE: Eastleigh, Hampshire, UK; 2003.
• [47]Johnson V, Webster J: Reaching the Parts… Community mapping: working together to tackle social exclusion and food poverty. London: Sustain: the alliance for better food and farming; 2000.
• [48]Gale NK, Heath G, Cameron E, Rashid S, Redwood S: Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Med Res Methodol 2013, 13(1):117. BioMed Central Full Text
• [49]Move away from the means test [http://www.cpag.org.uk/content/move-away-means-test webcite]
• [50]WIC income eligibility guidelines 2013-2014 [http://www.fns.usda.gov/wic/wic-income-eligibility-guidelines-2013-2014 webcite]
• [51]Welfare benefits uprating act 2013 [http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/16/contents/enacted/data.htm webcite]
• [52]Pinstrup-Andersen P: Nutrition-sensitive food systems: from rhetoric to action. Lancet 2013, 382(9890):375-376.
• [53]Sommerville J, Henderson H, Lennox A: Diet and nutrition survey of infants and young children 2011. Annexe A: healthy start. London: Department of Health and Food Standards Agency; 2013.
• [54]McAndrew F, Thompson J, Fellows L, Large A, Speed M, Renfrew MJ: Infant feeding survey 2010. Health and Social Care Information Centre: Leeds; 2012.
• [55]Why are fewer Moms applying for safety net program? [http://www.pewstates.org/projects/stateline/headlines/why-are-fewer-moms-applying-for-safety-net-program-85899383310 webcite]