A Brief Motivational Intervention Differentially Reduces Sugar-sweetened Beverage (SSB) Consumption.

BACKGROUND: Environmental and behavioral interventions hold promise to reduce sugar-sweetened beverage (SSBs) consumption. PURPOSE: To test, among frequent SSB consumers, whether motivations to consume SSBs moderated the effects of (a) a workplace SSB sales ban (environmental intervention) alone, and (b) a "brief motivational intervention" (BI) in addition to the sales ban, on changes in SSB consumption. METHODS: We assessed whether (1) baseline motivations to consume SSBs (craving, psychological stress, or taste enjoyment) impacted changes in daily SSB consumption at 6-month follow-up among frequent (>12oz of SSBs/day) SSB consumers (N = 214); (2) participants randomized to the BI (n = 109) versus to the sales ban only (n = 105) reported greater reductions in SSB consumption at follow-up; and (3) motivations to consume SSBs moderated any changes in SSB consumption. RESULTS: In response to the sales ban alone, individuals with stronger SSB cravings (+1 SD) at baseline showed significantly smaller reductions in daily SSB consumption at 6-month follow-up relative to individuals with weaker (-1 SD) SSB cravings (2.5 oz vs. 22.5 oz), p < .01. Receiving the BI significantly increased reductions for those with stronger SSB cravings: Among individuals with stronger cravings, those who received the BI evidenced significantly greater reductions in daily SSB consumption [M(SE) = -19.2 (2.74) oz] than those who did not [M(SE) = -2.5 (2.3) oz, p < .001], a difference of 16.72 oz. CONCLUSIONS: Frequent SSB consumers with stronger SSB cravings report minimal reductions in daily SSB consumption with a sales ban only, but report greater reductions if they also receive a motivational intervention. Future multilevel interventions for institutions should consider both environmental and individualized multi-level interventions. CLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION: NCT02585336.

Pregnant Patient Perceptions of Provider Detection and Treatment of Insomnia.

Objective: To survey pregnant patients about whether their health care providers assessed insomnia, the types of treatment recommendations providers made, and the types of treatments patients utilized. Participants: Participants were 423 English-speaking pregnant women. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, participants self-reported insomnia symptoms on the Insomnia Severity Index and indicated whether they discussed their sleep with a health care provider, whether they received any recommendations to improve their sleep, and whether they utilized any interventions or aids to improve their sleep during their current pregnancy. Results: Approximately one-third (39%) of participants reported that they discussed their sleep with a health care provider at some point during their pregnancy. Among participants who reported moderate to severe insomnia symptoms (Insomnia Severity Index>14), 57% reported that they had discussed their sleep with a health care provider, and 28% reported receiving an insomnia diagnosis. Over-the-counter medication was the most commonly recommended (53%) and utilized (39%) sleep intervention among women with moderate to severe insomnia symptoms. Conclusions: According to patient report, insomnia may be under-detected during pregnancy. When insomnia is recognized, treatment recommendations do not match clinical practice guidelines or women's preferences for receiving cognitive behavior therapy for insomnia. Taken together with previous research on the prevalence and consequences of prenatal insomnia, these findings suggest the need for an increased focus on the importance of sleep during pregnancy.