Wellness in the Schools: A Lunch Intervention Increases Fruit and Vegetable Consumption.

Wellness in the Schools (WITS) is a national non-profit organization partnering with public schools to provide healthy, scratch cooked, less processed meals (called an Alternative Menu), and active recess. This study examined the effects of WITS programming on school lunch consumption, including fruit and vegetable intake, in second and third grade students in New York City public schools serving a high proportion of students from low-income households. The intervention was evaluated with a quasi-experimental, controlled design with 14 elementary schools (7 that had initiated WITS programming in fall 2015 and were designated as intervention schools, and 7 matched Control schools). School lunch consumption was assessed by anonymous observation using the System of Observational Cafeteria Assessment of Foods Eaten (SOCAFE) tool in the fall of 2015 (Time 0, early intervention) and the spring of 2016 (Time 1) and 2017 (Time 2). There were no baseline data. Data were also collected on the types of entrées served in the months of October, January, and April during the two school years of the study. Across time points, and relative to students in the Control schools, students in WITS schools ate more fruits and vegetables (units = cups): Time 0: Control 0.18 vs. WITS 0.28; Time 1: Control 0.25 vs. WITS 0.31; and Time 2: Control 0.19 vs. WITS 0.27; p < 0.001. They also had more fruits and vegetables (cups) on their trays, which included more vegetables from the salad bar. However, students in the WITS schools ate fewer entrées (grain and protein) and drank less milk than students in the Control schools. Compared to the Control schools, WITS schools offered more homestyle entrées and fewer finger foods and sandwich entrees, i.e., less processed food. Students in WITS schools who received the Alternative menu and all of the WITS programming at all data collection time points selected and consumed more fruits and vegetables. Replication studies with randomized designs and true baseline data are needed to confirm these findings and to identify avenues for strengthening the effects of the program on other school lunch components.

Shifting care from hospital to community, a strategy to integrate care in Singapore: process evaluation of implementation fidelity.

BACKGROUND: Accessibility to efficient and person-centered healthcare delivery drives healthcare transformation in many countries. In Singapore, specialist outpatient clinics (SOCs) are commonly congested due to increasing demands for chronic care. To improve this situation, the National University Health System (NUHS) Regional Health System (RHS) started an integrated care initiative,the Right-Site Care (RSC) program in 2014. Through collaborations between SOCs at the National University Hospital and primary and community care (PCC) clinics in the western region of the county, the program was designed to facilitate timely discharge and appropriate transition of patients, who no longer required specialist care, to the community. The aim of this study was to evaluate the implementation fidelity of the NUHS RHS RSC program using the modified Conceptual Framework for Implementation Fidelity (CFIF), at three distinct levels; providers, organizational, and system levels to explain outcomes of the program and to inform further development of (similar) programs. METHODS: A convergent parallel mixed methods study using the realist evaluation approach was used. Data were collected between 2016 and 2018 through non-participatory observations, reviews of medical records and program database, together with semi-structured interviews with healthcare providers. Triangulation of data streams was applied guided by the modified CFIF. RESULTS: Our findings showed four out of six program components were implemented with low level of fidelity, and 9112 suitable patients were referred to the program while 3032 (33.3%) declined to be enrolled. Moderating factors found to influence fidelity included: (i) complexity of program, (ii) evolving providers' responsiveness, (iii) facilitation through synergistic partnership, training of PCC providers by specialists and supportive structures: care coordinators, guiding protocols, shared electronic medical record and shared pharmacy, (iv) lack of organization reinforcement, and (v) mismatch between program goals, healthcare financing and providers' reimbursement. CONCLUSION: Functional integration alone is insufficient for a successful right-site care program implementation. Improvement in relationships between providers, organizations, and patients are also warranted for further development of the program.

Retrospective evaluation of healthcare utilisation and mortality of two post-discharge care programmes in Singapore.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact on healthcare utilisation frequencies and charges, and mortality of a programme for frequent hospital utilisers and a programme for patients requiring high acuity post-discharge care as part of an integrated healthcare model. DESIGN: A retrospective quasi-experimental study without randomisation where patients who received post-discharge care interventions were matched 1:1 with unenrolled patients as controls. SETTING: The National University Health System (NUHS) Regional Health System (RHS), which was one of six RHS in Singapore, implemented the NUHS RHS Integrated Interventions and Care Extension (NICE) programme for frequent hospital utilisers and the NUHS Transitional Care Programme (NUHS TCP) for high acuity post-discharge care. The programmes were supported by the Ministry of Health in Singapore, which is a city-state nation located in Southeast Asia with a 5.6 million population. PARTICIPANTS: Linked healthcare administrative data, for the time period of January 2013 to December 2016, were extracted for patients enrolled in NICE (n=554) or NUHS TCP (n=270) from June 2014 to December 2015, and control patients. INTERVENTIONS: For both programmes, teams conducted follow-up home visits and phone calls to monitor and manage patients' post-discharge. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: One-year pre- and post-enrolment healthcare utilisation frequencies and charges of all-cause inpatient admissions, emergency admissions, emergency department attendances, specialist outpatient clinic (SOC) attendances, total inpatient length of stay and mortality rates were compared. RESULTS: Patients in NICE had lower mortality rate, but higher all-cause inpatient admission, emergency admission and emergency department attendance charges. Patients in NUHS TCP did not have lower mortality rate, but had higher emergency admission and SOC attendance charges. CONCLUSIONS: Both NICE and NUHS TCP had no improvements in 1 year healthcare utilisation across various setting and metrics. Singular interventions might not be as impactful in effecting utilisation without an overhauling transformation and restructuring of the hospital and healthcare system.