Evaluating a Food Pantry–Based Intervention to Improve Food Security,Dietary Intake,and Quality in Midwestern Food Pantries

BackgroundVoices for Food was a longitudinal community, food pantry–based intervention informed by the social ecological model, and designed to improve food security, dietary intake, and quality among clients, which was carried out in 24 rural food pantries across 6 Midwestern states.ObjectiveOur objective was to evaluate changes in adult food security, dietary intake, and quality from baseline (2014) to follow-up (2016), and to assess the role of adult food security on dietary outcomes.DesignA multistate, longitudinal, quasi-experimental intervention with matched treatment and comparison design was used to evaluate treatment vs comparison group changes over time and changes in both groups over time.Participants/settingAdult food pantry clients (n = 617) completed a demographic food security survey, and up to three 24-hour dietary recalls at baseline (n = 590) and follow-up (n = 160).InterventionCommunity coaching served as the experimental component, which only “treatment” communities received, and a food council guide and food pantry toolkit were provided to both “treatment” and matched “comparison” communities.Main outcome measuresChange in adult food security status, mean usual intakes of nutrients and food groups, and Healthy Eating Index-2010 scores were the main outcome measures.Statistical analyses performedLinear mixed models estimated changes in outcomes by intervention group and by adult food security status over time.ResultsImprovements in adult food security score (–0.7 ± 0.3; P = .01), Healthy Eating Index-2010 total score (4.2 ± 1.1; P < .0001), and empty calories component score (3.4 ± 0.5; P <.0001) from baseline to follow-up were observed in treatment and comparison groups, but no statistically significant changes were found for adult food security status, dietary quality, and usual intakes of nutrients and food groups between the 2 groups over time. The intervention effect on dietary quality and usual intake changes over time by adult food security status were also not observed.ConclusionsFood pantry clients in treatment and comparison groups had higher food security and dietary quality at the follow-up evaluation of the Voices for Food intervention trial compared with baseline, despite the lack of difference among the groups as a result of the experimental coaching component.     

基于文献的老年人群常见证候分布特征研究＊

目的 了解我国老年人中医证候分布特征，为中医药辨治老年人提供参考依据。方法 系统检索中国知识基础设施（CNKI）、中文科技期刊数据库（CCD）、万方数据资源系统数据库（CSPD），纳入研究对象为老年人的临床流行病学调查研究文献，对其调查目的、调查疾病及调查结果等进行描述统计。结果 ①最终纳入168篇文献，其中2010至2020年之间发表138篇（82.14%）；调查地区涵盖全国28个省市自治区，共纳入43948例老年人，累计覆盖340个研究中心；②主要研究结果显示，老年人中医证候阴虚阳亢证（10.05%）>血瘀证（9.5%）>痰浊（湿）证（8.91%）>阴阳两虚证（4.98%）>痰瘀互结证（4.96%）；单元证分布阴虚证（14.70%）>痰证（11.22%）>气虚证（7.15%）>肾虚证（4.72%）>血瘀证（4.18%）；涉及病变脏腑肾>肝>脾>肺>心。结论 根据统计结果，可以看出老年人证候分布虚证多于实证，虚证中又以阴虚证、气虚证最为多见，实证常见血瘀证、痰浊（湿）证等，且多见痰瘀互结证；老年人五脏皆损，其中又以肾、肝、脾功能失调最为突出。     

特发性肺纤维化急性加重期证候与血清生物标志物的相关性研究＊

目的 通过分析特发性肺纤维化急性加重期（AE-IPF）患者证候与血清生物标志物的关系，为中医辨证治疗提供参考。方法 采用观察性研究设计，收集2019年3月至2019年11月三个中心的AE-IPF患者76例，其中痰热壅肺证26例、痰浊阻肺证50例，并纳入健康志愿者10例作为对照。采用ELISA测定患者血清CCL18、HMGB1、KL-6、MMP-7、SP-A和SP-D水平，分析与中医证候的相关性。结果 AE-IPF患者血清CCL18、HMGB1、KL-6、MMP-7、SP-A和SP-D水平均显著高于健康对照组。血清CCL18、HMGB1、KL-6、MMP-7和SP-D水平在痰热壅肺证和痰浊阻肺证患者间无显著性差异（P＞0.05），而血清SP-A水平存在显著性差异（P＜0.05）。结论 血清SP-A与AE-IPF证候存在一定的相关性，血清SP-A的浓度升高，与痰热壅肺证关系越密切，反之，血清SP-A浓度降低，则与痰浊阻肺证关系越密切。AE-IPF痰热壅肺证患者的预后可能较痰浊阻肺证患者更差。     

Exploring Mothers’ Perspectives About Why Grandparents in Appalachia Give Their Grandchildren Cariogenic Foods and Beverages: A Qualitative Study

BackgroundDental caries is the most common chronic childhood disease. Past studies revealed that grandparents provide their grandchildren with cariogenic foods and beverages (eg, those with free sugars and/or modified starches). Qualitative research can help identify what drives this phenomenon.ObjectiveOur aim was to examine mothers’ explanations for why grandparents in north central and central Appalachia give their grandchildren cariogenic foods and beverages.DesignA qualitative study on children’s oral health in Pennsylvania and West Virginia from 2018 through 2020 was performed. In-person, semi-structured interviews were conducted. Qualitative data from interviews were recorded, transcribed, and then coded using NVivo. Data analysis for this study was performed using thematic analysis with iterative theme development.Participants/settingThe participants were 126 mothers of children aged 3-5 years from West Virginia (n = 66) and Pittsburgh, PA (n = 60).Main outcome measuresMothers’ perspectives about why grandparents give their grandchildren cariogenic foods and beverages were analyzed.ResultsIn the study sample, 85% of mothers (n = 107/126) named at least 1 of their children’s grandparents as a member of their social network responsible for their children’s oral health. From these interviews, 85% of mothers (n = 91/107) discussed that grandparents gave their grandchildren cariogenic foods and beverages. The mothers described the following 4 themes to explain why grandparents gave their grandchildren cariogenic foods and beverages: privilege of the grandparent role; responsibilities of the grandparent role; symbol of care and affection; and limited consideration or understanding of the detrimental impact.ConclusionsGrandparents play a role in giving their grandchildren cariogenic foods and beverages, which could potentially contribute to childhood caries. Research is needed to develop effective social interventions to help some grandparents understand the implications of a cariogenic diet on their grandchildren’s oral health and/or decrease their provision of cariogenic foods and beverages.     

The role of National Immunization Technical Advisory Groups (NITAG) in strengthening health system governance: Lessons from three middle-income countries—Argentina,Jordan, and South Africa (2017–2018)

IntroductionToward the Global Vaccine Action Plan 2020 goal, almost 90% of countries have established a National Immunization Technical Advisory Group (NITAG). However, little is known about NITAG's contributions to governance.MethodsIn 2017–2018, a two-step, qualitative retrospective study was conducted. Jordan (JO), Argentina (AR), and South Africa (SA) were selected owing to government-financed NITAGs from middle-income countries (MICs), geographic diversity, and a vaccine introduction with NITAG support. Country case studies were developed, collecting data through desk review and face-to-face key informant interviews (KIIs) from Ministry of Health (MoH) and NITAG. Case studies were analyzed together, to assess governance applying the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies framework focusing on transparency, accountability, participation, integrity, and policy capacity (TAPIC).ResultsDocument review and 53 KII (22 AR, 20 SA, 11 JO) showed NITAGs played a pivotal role as advisors promoting a culture of evidence-informed policies. NITAGs strengthened governance, although practices varied among countries. Meetings were conducted behind-closed-doors, participation restricted to members, only in one country agendas, and recommendations were public (AR). To increase participation, policy capacity, and transparency, countries considered adding experts in communications, advocacy, and economics. AR and SA contemplated including community members. NITAGs functioned autonomously from the government, with no established internal or external monitoring or supervision. NITAG meeting minutes allowed the review of integrity, adherence to terms of reference, standard operating procedures, and conflict of interest (CoI). For the most part, NITAGs abided by their mandates. Significant issues were related to the level of MoH support and oversight of CoI declaration and documentation.ConclusionsSystematically implementing governance approaches could improve processes, better tailor policies, and implementation. The long-term survival and resilience of NITAGs in these countries showed they play a significant role in strengthening governance. Lessons learned could be useful to those promoting country-driven evidence-informed decision-making.