How does eligibility for GusNIP produce prescriptions relate to fruit and vegetable purchases and what factors shape the relationship? A protocol for a secondary analysis of nationally representative data in the USA.

INTRODUCTION: US Department of Agriculture (USDA) Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Programme (GusNIP) produce prescription programme (PPR) 'prescriptions' provide eligible participants with low income, risk for diet-related chronic disease and food insecurity a healthcare issued incentive to purchase lower to no cost fruits and vegetables (FVs). However, GusNIP requirements specify that PPR prescriptions can only be redeemed for fresh (not frozen, canned or dried) FVs. This requirement may prevent participants from fully engaging in or benefiting from GusNIP PPR, given communities with lower healthy food access may have reduced fresh FV accessibility. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will use the nationally representative 2012-2013 National Household Food Acquisition and Purchase Survey (FoodAPS) and complementary FoodAPS Geography Component data in a secondary data analysis to examine how household GusNIP PPR eligibility relates to the quantity and variety of fresh, frozen, canned and dried FV purchases and to what extent individual, household and food environment factors shape the relationship. FoodAPS data include household food purchasing and acquisition information across a 7 day period from 14 317 individuals among 4826 households and was collected between April 2012 and January 2013. The FoodAPS Geography Component provides information about the local community/environment relative to FoodAPS households. This study will examine the correlation or association of selected variables between different quantities and varieties of fresh, frozen, canned and dried FVs, as well as correlations among multilevel predictors. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: We are following data integrity standards as outlined by agreements with the USDA Economic Research Service. All results of analyses will undergo a thorough disclosure review to ensure no identifiable data are shared. Results will be disseminated to research, practice and policy communities using an Open Access peer-reviewed manuscript(s), scientific and practice presentations, and a public facing report and infographic.

Implementation of Food is Medicine Programs in Healthcare Settings: A Narrative Review.

Food is Medicine (FIM) programs to improve the accessibility of fruits and vegetables (FVs) or other healthy foods among patients with low income and diet-related chronic diseases are promising to improve food and nutrition security in the United States (US). However, FIM programs are relatively new and implementation guidance for healthcare settings using an implementation science lens is lacking. We used a narrative review to describe the evidence base on barriers and facilitators to FIM program integration in US healthcare settings following the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS) Framework. Evidence surrounding the EPIS Inner Context was a focus, including constructs Leadership, Organizational Characteristics, Quality and Fidelity Monitoring and Support, Organizational Staffing Processes, and Individual Characteristics. Peer-reviewed and grey literature about barriers and facilitators to FIM programs were of interest, defined as programs that screen and refer eligible patients with diet-related chronic disease experiencing food insecurity to healthy, unprepared foods. Thirty-one sources were included in the narrative review, including 22 peer-reviewed articles, four reports, four toolkits, and one thesis. Twenty-eight sources (90%) described EPIS Inner Context facilitators and 26 sources (84%) described FIM program barriers. The most common barriers and facilitators to FIM programs were regarding Quality and Fidelity Monitoring and Support (e.g., use of electronic medical records for tracking and evaluation, strategies to support implementation) and Organizational Staffing Processes (e.g., clear delineation of staff roles and capacity); although, barriers and facilitators to FIM programs were identified among all EPIS Inner Context constructs. We synthesized barriers and facilitators to create an EPIS-informed implementation checklist for healthcare settings for use among healthcare organizations/providers, partner organizations, and technical assistance personnel. We discuss future directions to align FIM efforts with implementation science terminology and theories, models, and frameworks to improve the implementation evidence base and support FIM researchers and practitioners.

Food is Medicine and implementation science: A recipe for health equity.

Diet-related chronic diseases such as Type II diabetes, cardiometabolic diseases, and cancer are among the leading causes of death in the USA. Nutrition security has emerged as a target outcome and a national priority for preventative medicine and the treatment of diet-related chronic diseases. Food is Medicine (FIM) initiatives encompass programs and interventions to meet priority population's needs across food and nutrition security continuums as a mechanism to address persistent food and nutrition inequities. In this position statement, we draw on implementation science, specifically the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS) Framework and health equity principles to provide guidance on FIM initiatives. As the FIM evidence base continues to grow, we encourage the EPIS framework be applied as one lens through which we can improve our understanding of FIM implementation among multiple contexts to understand what works, for whom, and under what circumstances. Ultimately, this position statement aims to call to action the incorporation of implementation science and equity principles into FIM efforts.

This paper proposes that, in order to reduce the rates of Type II diabetes, cardiometabolic diseases, and cancer, among others; we prioritize Food is Medicine (FIM) as a way to prevent and address the impact of diet-related diseases. FIM is a pyramid of programs interested in promoting access to nutritious foods consistently to promote health. We use a framework from the field of implementation science and guiding ideas to propose FIM programs that can reach every community in an equitable way.

Healthy eating and active living policy, systems, and environmental changes in rural Louisiana: a contextual inquiry to inform implementation strategies.

BACKGROUND: Healthy eating and active living policy, systems, and environmental (PSE) changes are implemented across the United States through Cooperative Extension. However, translating multisector PSE changes to practice in community settings is challenging and there is a lack of knowledge about barriers and facilitators to PSE changes among state Extension systems using standardized frameworks. Therefore, a research-to-practice partnership effort aimed to identify Louisiana Cooperative Extension Service Family and Consumer Science (LFCS) practitioners' barriers and facilitators to implementing PSE changes in rural Louisiana communities. METHODS: A qualitative approach using the 2022 Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (2022 CFIR) was used. Focus group discussions were conducted at five LFCS regional trainings between February and May 2022. All LFCS practitioners with any level of experience implementing healthy eating and active living PSE changes were eligible to participate, with emphasis on understanding efforts within more rural communities. Focus group discussions were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Researchers analyzed qualitative data using the constant comparison method and 2022 CFIR domains and constructs including Inner Setting (LFCS organization), Outer Setting (rural Louisiana communities), Innovation (PSE changes), and Individuals (PSE change implementation actors/partners). RESULTS: Across the five regions, LFCS practitioners (n = 40) described more barriers (n = 210) than facilitators (n = 100); findings were often coded with multiple 2022 CFIR domains. Reported Inner Setting barriers were lack of formal or informal information sharing and lack of access to knowledge and information. Outer Setting barriers included sustaining and initiating community partnerships and local environmental or political conditions. Individual barriers included a lack of time and expertise, and Innovation barriers included the complex nature of rural PSE changes. Facilitators were mentioned at multiple levels and included community partner buy-in and practitioners' motivation to implement PSE changes. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation strategies are needed to build on organizational strengths and to overcome multi-level barriers to PSE change implementation among LFCS practitioners. The results from the in-depth contextual inquiry used could serve as a guide for future pragmatic assessment efforts among other state Extension systems or as a model for identifying barriers and facilitators and associated implementation strategies among other public health systems in the U.S. and abroad.

Matching barriers and facilitators to implementation strategies: recommendations for community settings.

BACKGROUND: Implementation science aims to improve the integration of evidence-based interventions in real-world settings. While its methods and models could potentially apply to any field with evidence-based interventions, most research thus far has originated in clinical settings. Community settings often have fewer resources, missions beyond health, and a lack of support and expertise to implement evidence-based interventions when compared to many clinical settings. Thus, selecting and tailoring implementation strategies in community settings is particularly challenging, as existing compilations are primarily operationalized through clinical setting terminology. In this debate, we (1) share the process of using an existing match tool to select implementation strategies to increase uptake of nutrition and physical activity policy, systems, and environment interventions in community settings and (2) discuss the challenges of this process to argue that selecting implementation strategies in community settings has limited transferability from clinical settings and may require a unique implementation strategy compilation and pragmatic matching tool. MATCHING BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES: The impetus for this debate paper came from our work selecting implementation strategies to improve the implementation and eventual scaling of nutrition and physical activity policy, systems, and environment interventions in a community settings. We conducted focus groups with practitioners and used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research-Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change match tool to select potential implementation strategies to overcome prominent barriers. There was limited congruence between tool outputs and optimal strategies, which may in part be due to differences in context between clinical and community settings. Based on this, we outline needs and recommendations for developing a novel and pragmatic matching tool for researchers and practitioners in community settings. CONCLUSIONS: More work is needed to refine the implementation barrier-strategy matching process to ensure it is relevant, rapid, and rigorous. As leading implementation strategy scholars note, as more researchers document contextual factors and strategies selected to address them, the knowledge base will increase, and refined mapping processes can emerge.

Structural racism and geographic access to food retailers in the United States: A scoping review.

This scoping review summarized findings and key measures from U.S.-based studies that 1) examined associations between geographic indicators of structural racism (e.g., redlining, racial segregation) and access to food retailers (e.g., supermarkets, convenience stores) or 2) documented disparities in access by neighborhood racial/ethnic composition. In 2022, relevant scientific literature was reviewed using Covidence software. Independent reviewers examined 13,069 citations; 163 citations advanced to the full-text review stage and 70 were selected for inclusion. Twenty-one studies (30%) linked one or more indicator of structural racism to food retailer access while 49 (70%) solely examined differences in access by neighborhood racial/ethnic composition. All studies featuring indicators of structural racism reported significant findings; however, indicators varied across studies making it difficult to make direct comparisons. Key indicators of structural racism in the food access literature included redlining (n = 3), gentrification (n = 3), and racial segregation (n = 4). Many U.S.-based studies have evaluated food retailer access by neighborhood racial/ethnic composition. Moving forward, studies should model indicators of structural racism and determine their influence on geographic access to large and small food retailers.

Louisiana trucking companies' implementation of workplace health promotion programs: Explanatory sequential mixed method case study.

BACKGROUND: Trucking companies may be key partners for workplace health promotion programs to improve heavy and tractor-trailer drivers' health and wellbeing. OBJECTIVE: To identify barriers and facilitators to implementing workplace health promotion programs among Louisiana trucking companies' leadership and staff. METHODS: A case study approach following an explanatory sequential mixed method research design was used. A quantitative survey, based on the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), was adapted and distributed online to a convenience sample. Survey respondents were recruited for an interview to gain additional insight on multi-level barriers to implementing workplace health promotion programs. Quantitative data was analyzed using descriptive statistics to describe barriers and facilitators following TDF constructs. Qualitative data were independently coded among two researchers following the TDF and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to determine themes. RESULTS: Eleven workplace leaders or staff took the survey. Two engaged in a follow-up interview. Regarding the quantitative results, most (82%) believed workplace health promotion programs would save their company money, although were not offering them. No TDF constructs were indicated as barriers given mixed results; however, several were facilitators: Social/Professional Role and Identity; Emotion; Action Planning; Knowledge; Motivation and Goals; and Beliefs about Consequences. Qualitative results captured several Inner (e.g., time, money) and Outer Setting contextual (e.g., truckers' needs and resources) factors considered important to trucking companies' implementation of health promotion programs. CONCLUSION: Results suggest leadership and staff of Louisiana trucking companies value workplace health promotion programs, although are challenged by limited resources and the broader trucking environment.

Using the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS) Framework to Advance the Science and Practice of Healthy Food Retail.

Although healthy food retail strategies are widely used, there appears to be a limited understanding of the processes and determinants for successful adoption, implementation, and sustainment. To fill this gap, we recommend the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS) framework to be used to advance the science and practice of healthy food retail. In this perspective, we: (1) introduce EPIS and describe why it was chosen as a recommended implementation science framework for healthy food retail, (2) highlight healthy food retail evidence supporting EPIS, and (3) discuss research and practice needs moving forward.

Rethinking Efforts to Improve Dietary Patterns Among Long-Haul Truck Drivers: Transforming Truck Stop Retail Food Environments Through Upstream Change.

A multitude of upstream occupational exposures influence poor dietary patterns that contribute to cardiometabolic health disparities among long-haul truck drivers in the United States. Herein, we delineate the unique characteristics of the truck driving profession that shape dietary patterns. Next, we discuss current health promotion efforts and why they are unlikely to be sufficient for improving population-level dietary patterns. We then advocate for prioritizing health promotion efforts that target upstream factors that influence population dietary patterns and have the potential to holistically and sustainably support drivers' nutrition. Finally, we propose novel research directions to catalyze upstream-oriented health promotion efforts.

Nutrition interventions addressing structural racism: a scoping review.

African Americans experience high rates of obesity and food insecurity in part due to structural racism, or overlapping discriminatory systems and practices in housing, education, employment, health care and other settings. Nutrition education and nutrition-focused policy, systems and environmental changes may be able to address structural racism in the food environment. This scoping review aimed to summarise the available literature regarding nutrition interventions for African Americans that address structural racism in the food environment and compare them with the 'Getting to Equity in Obesity Prevention' framework of suggested interventions. An electronic literature search was conducted with the assistance of a research librarian encompassing six databases: MEDLINE, PyscINFO, Agricola, ERIC, SocINDEX and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. A total of thirty sources were identified detailing interventions addressing structural barriers to healthy eating. The majority of nutrition interventions addressing structural racism consisted of policy, systems and/or environmental changes in combination with nutrition education, strategies focused on proximal causes of racial health disparities. Only two articles each targeted the 'reduce deterrents' and 'improve social and economic resources' aspects of the framework, interventions which may be better suited to addressing structural racism in the food environment. Because African Americans experience high rates of obesity and food insecurity and encounter structural barriers to healthy eating in the food environment, researchers and public health professionals should address this gap in the literature.

Struggling with the basics: food and housing insecurity among college students across twenty-two colleges and universities.

OBJECTIVES: To quantify the number and type of students failing to secure basic needs. PARTICIPANTS: Students attending 22 postsecondary schools in the United States in Fall 2019. METHODS: The Adult Food Security Module and part of the #RealCollege Survey were used to measure food and housing insecurity, respectively. Logistic and linear regression models were used to assess the relationship between selected factors and basic needs insecurities. RESULTS: Participants (n = 22,153) were classified as 44.1% and 52.3% food insecure and housing insecure, respectively. Homeless students or those who experienced childhood food insecurity were at the greatest odds of college food insecurity. Year in school was the largest contributor to being housing insecure, with PhD or EdD students being 1,157% more likely to experience housing insecurity compared to freshmen. CONCLUSIONS: High prevalence of basic needs insecurities remain. Current campus initiatives may be insufficient, calling for a more holistic approach at the campus, state, and national levels.

African Americans' perceptions of nutrition interventions: a scoping review.

Nutrition education and policy, systems and environmental (PSE) change interventions may be able to address food insecurity and obesity, conditions which are disproportionately experienced by African Americans. Work that seeks to address these disparities and advance social justice should uplift and learn from participant voices, particularly from marginalised groups. This scoping review aimed to summarise the available literature describing African Americans' perceptions of and experiences participating in nutrition interventions. We conducted an electronic literature search with the assistance of a research librarian which encompassed six databases (MEDLINE, PyscINFO, Agricola, ERIC, SocINDEX and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses) and identified thirty-five sources meeting our inclusion criteria. The majority of studies assessing African Americans' satisfaction with interventions examined educational interventions alone, and about half of the included studies assessed satisfaction through quantitative methods alone. The only studies which found participants to be dissatisfied with interventions used qualitative methods and examined interventions providing education alone. Future work should evaluate African Americans' experience with nutrition-focused PSE changes, interventions which may be better able to address racial disparities in obesity and food insecurity. Nutrition educators working with African Americans should also consider evaluating future interventions using qualitative inquiry, to obtain an in-depth understanding of participant experiences with interventions.

Improving Fruit and Vegetable Accessibility, Purchasing, and Consumption to Advance Nutrition Security and Health Equity in the United States.

In recent years, national and local efforts to improve diet and health in the United States have stressed the importance of nutrition security, which emphasizes consistent access to foods and beverages that promote health and prevent disease among all individuals. At the core of this endeavor is fruit and vegetable (FV) consumption, a dietary practice that is integral to attaining and sustaining a healthy diet. Unfortunately, significant inequities in FV accessibility, purchasing, and consumption exist, particularly among populations that are socially and economically disadvantaged. To achieve nutrition and health equity in the United States, the field must center the goal of nutrition security and initiatives that aim to increase FV consumption, specifically, in future work. The International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (IJERPH) Special Issue titled "Nutrition and Health Equity: Revisiting the Importance of Fruit and Vegetable Availability, Purchasing, and Consumption" features several scholarly publications from experts conducting timely research on these topics. In this commentary, we (1) summarize the U.S.-based literature on inequities in FV accessibility, purchasing, and consumption, (2) describe how the contributions to this IJERPH special issue can advance nutrition security and health equity, and (3) outline future research questions from our perspective.

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)-authorised store marketing environments in Louisiana encourage the selection of less nutritious foods and beverages.

Marketing influences consumers' dietary purchases. However, little is known about marketing environments in Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)-authorised stores. The present study explored SNAP-authorised store marketing environments in Louisiana by rurality, store ownership and store type (n 42). Sampling methods were designed to include randomly selected stores in each geographic area of the state. The GroPromo was used to measure placement, promotion, and child-focused aspects of marketing strategies used for healthier (fruits and vegetables) and less healthy products (chips, candy, sugar-sweetened beverages, child-focused cereal) in medium- and high-prominence marketing areas. In using multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) (P < 0⋅05) for data analysis, variations in GroPromo scores were found among SNAP-authorised stores by rurality (P < 0⋅05) and store ownership (P < 0⋅001); no differences were found by store type (P > 0⋅05). Future research, practice and policy strategies are required to understand the influence of marketing environments on SNAP participants' dietary quality and to design responsive public health interventions.

Using implementation strategies in community settings: an introduction to the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) compilation and future directions.

In this commentary, we introduce public health practitioners and researchers to implementation science through an established compilation of implementation strategies. We provide terminology and examples for community settings so public health practitioners and researchers can use implementation strategies and document efforts using standard terminology. We also discuss the need for future work to determine the extent to which these implementation strategies work and are most useful in community settings, and ultimately, how health behaviors are impacted. We intend this commentary to serve as a dissemination strategy for implementation strategies and to contribute to knowledge in the growing field of implementation science in community settings.

In this paper, we present public health-workers and researchers to the field of implementation science. We do this through sharing a set of implementation strategies. Implementation strategies are methods used to improve the use of tested programs. We share language and samples so community public health-workers and researchers can use implementation strategies and report their work using standard language. We also discuss the need for future work to assess how well these implementation strategies work and which are most useful in community settings. The end goal is to increase the use of tested programs and improve community members' health. We intend this paper to share implementation strategies and add to the growing field of implementation science in community settings.

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)-authorized retailers received a low score using the Business Impact Assessment for Obesity and population-level nutrition (BIA-Obesity) tool.

BACKGROUND: The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) supports Americans with lower income to purchase dietary products at authorized retailers. This research aimed to evaluate SNAP-authorized retailers' public commitments in support of nutrition security and to examine differences between traditional grocers and nontraditional (e.g., convenience, drug, dollar) SNAP-authorized retailers' public commitments. METHODS: Prominent United States (U.S.) SNAP-authorized retailers nationally and in two U.S. states (California and Virginia) were identified based on number of store locations (n = 61). Public information available in grey literature were reviewed and scored using the Business Impact Assessment for Obesity and population-level nutrition (BIA-Obesity) tool. SNAP-authorized retailers were classified as traditional (e.g., grocery) or nontraditional (e.g., non-grocery) retailers. Total BIA-Obesity from 0 to 615, representing low to optimal support) and category scores were calculated for corporate strategy, relationships with external organizations, product formulation, nutrition labeling, product and brand promotion, and product accessibility. Descriptive statistics were used to describe BIA-Obesity scores overall and by category. Mann-Whitney U was used to test for potential differences in median BIA-Obesity total scores between traditional and nontraditional SNAP-authorized retailers (a priori, p < 0.05). RESULTS: Average total BIA-Obesity scores for SNAP-authorized retailers ranged from 0 to 112 (16.5 ± 23.3). Total BIA-Obesity scores for traditional SNAP-authorized retailers (32.7 ± 33.6; median 25) were higher than nontraditional SNAP-authorized retailer scores (11.2 ± 16; median 5) (p = 0.008). For BIA-Obesity categories, average scores were highest for the category relationships with external organizations (8.3 ± 10.3) and lowest for promotion practices (0.6 ± 2.1). CONCLUSIONS: Results of this research underscore a dearth of available evidence and substantial opportunity for improvement regarding SNAP-authorized retailer strategies to support nutrition security among Americans with lower income.

Disparities in dietary practices during the COVID-19 pandemic by food security status.

Little is known about the differences in dietary practices among food secure and food insecure populations during the early COVID-19 pandemic restrictions. The purpose of this study was to examine differences in dietary practices the early COVID-19 pandemic restrictions between adults reporting food security versus food insecurity. An online cross-sectional survey using validated measures was administered between April and September 2020 to explore both dietary patterns and practices and food security status among persons residing in five U.S. states from different regions of the country during the COVID-19 pandemic. Between-group differences (food secure versus food insecure) were examined for dietary practice outcomes using Pearson's Chi-Square test statistic, with Fisher's Exact test for cell counts less than five. There were 3,213 adult respondents. Food insecurity increased among the survey sample from 15.9% before the COVID-19 pandemic to 23.1% during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic (p < 0.01). Compared to food secure respondents, those experiencing food insecurity reported more group gatherings for meals during the pandemic, decreased fruit and vegetable intake, and a need for more nutrition support resources than food secure respondents (p < 0.05). Food secure individuals reported increasing alcohol consumption, more frequent take-out or delivery ordering from fast food or restaurants, and more interest in supporting the local food system (p < 0.05). Results indicate a clear risk of disparities in dietary practices based on food security status during the early COVID-19 pandemic restrictions. Public health research, practice, and policy efforts should tailor specific efforts towards both food secure and food insecure groups.

Validity of a Market Basket Assessment Tool for Use in Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Education Healthy Retail Initiatives.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the validity of the Market Basket Analysis Tool (MBAT) for food environment quality within various retail environments compared to the Nutrition Environment Measures Survey in Stores (NEMS-S). METHODS: In-store assessments using the MBAT and the NEMS-S on the same day in a given store were conducted in grocery stores, corner stores, pharmacies, and dollar stores in a metropolis, and urban and rural counties across 4 states: Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, and Virginia. Descriptive statistics, correlations, and ANOVAs were used to assess store location, store type differences, and MBAT and NEMS-S scores. RESULTS: Market Basket Analysis Tool and NEMS-S data were collected from 114 stores. Market Basket Analysis Tool and NEMS-S total and all individual component scores were significantly correlated (r = 0.84, P ≤ 0.0001; r range, 0.51-0.88; P ≤ 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The MBAT offers a methodology to measure the food retail environment focusing on the availability of healthful food items with a reduced training time and streamlined data collection compared with the NEMS-S. Future work can assess the completion time of the MBAT compared with the NEMS-S and the ability of the MBAT to detect changes in food environment quality post healthy food retail interventions.