Nutrition Research and Practice

The Korean Nutrition Society (한국영양학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The effect of a healthy school tuck shop program on the access of students to healthy foods

  • Kim, Ki-Rang (Department of Preventive Medicine, College of Medicine, Hanyang University) ;
  • Hong, Seo-Ah (Department of Preventive Medicine, College of Medicine, Hanyang University) ;
  • Yun, Sung-Ha (Department of Preventive Medicine, College of Medicine, Hanyang University) ;
  • Ryou, Hyun-Joo (Health Promotion Division, Seoul Metropolitan Government) ;
  • Lee, Sang-Sun (Department of Food and Nutrition, Hanyang University) ;
  • Kim, Mi-Kyung (Department of Preventive Medicine, College of Medicine, Hanyang University)
  • Received : 2011.07.18
  • Accepted : 2012.01.18
  • Published : 2012.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of a healthy school tuck shop program, developed as a way of creating a healthy and nutritional school environment, on students' access to healthy foods. Five middle schools and four high schools (775 students) participated in the healthy school tuck shop program, and nine schools (1,282 students) were selected as the control group. The intervention program included restriction of unhealthy foods sold in tuck shops, provision of various fruits, and indirect nutritional education with promotion of healthy food products. The program evaluation involved the examination of students' purchase and intake patterns of healthy foods, satisfaction with the available foodstuffs, and utilization of and satisfaction with nutritional educational resources. Our results indicated that among of the students who utilized the tuck shop, about 40% purchased fruit products, showing that availability of healthy foods in the tuck shop increased the accessibility of healthy foods for students. Overall food purchase and intake patterns did not significantly change during the intervention period. However, students from the intervention schools reported higher satisfaction with the healthy food products sold in the tuck shop than did those from the control schools (all $P$ < 0.001), and they were highly satisfied with the educational resources provided to them. In conclusion, the healthy school tuck shop program had a positive effect on the accessibility of healthy food. The findings suggest that a healthy school tuck shop may be an effective environmental strategy for promoting students' access to healthy foods.

Keywords

References

  1. Government Office for Science. Tackling Obesities: Future Choices-International Comparisons of Obesity Trends, Determinants and Responses-Evidence Review, URN 07/926A2. London: Government Office for Science; 2007.
  2. Sallis JF, Owen N. Ecological models of health behavior. In: Glanz K, Rimer BK, Lewis FM, editors. Health Behavior and Health Education. Theory, Research, and Practice. 3rd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2002. p.462-84.
  3. Story M, Nanney MS, Schwartz MB. Schools and obesity prevention: creating school environments and policies to promote healthy eating and physical activity. Milbank Q 2009;87:71-100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0009.2009.00548.x
  4. World Health Organization. Diet, Nutrition and the Prevention of Chronic Diseases. Report of a Joint WHO/FAO Expert Consultation. WHO Technical Report Series No 916. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2003.
  5. French SA, Stables G. Environmental interventions to promote vegetable and fruit consumption among youth in school settings. Prev Med 2003;37:593-610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2003.09.007
  6. French SA, Wechsler H. School-based research and initiatives: fruit and vegetable environment, policy, and pricing workshop. Prev Med 2004;39 Suppl 2:S101-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2003.10.007
  7. Swinburn BA, Caterson I, Seidell JC, James WP. Diet, nutrition and the prevention of excess weight gain and obesity. Public Health Nutr 2004;7:123-46.
  8. Tak NI, Te Velde SJ, Brug J. Long-term effects of the Dutch Schoolgruiten Project--promoting fruit and vegetable consumption among primary-school children. Public Health Nutr 2009;12:1213-23. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980008003777
  9. Cullen KW, Hartstein J, Reynolds KD, Vu M, Resnicow K, Greene N, White MA; Studies to Treat or Prevent Pediatric Type 2 Diabetes Prevention Study Group. Improving the school food environment: results from a pilot study in middle schools. J Am Diet Assoc 2007;107:484-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jada.2006.12.004
  10. Cullen KW, Watson K, Zakeri I, Ralston K. Exploring changes in middle-school student lunch consumption after local school food service policy modifications. Public Health Nutr 2006;9:814-20.
  11. Rasmussen M, Krolner R, Klepp KI, Lytle L, Brug J, Bere E, Due P. Determinants of fruit and vegetable consumption among children and adolescents: a review of the literature. Part I: Quantitative studies. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2006;3:22. https://doi.org/10.1186/1479-5868-3-22
  12. French SA, Story M, Fulkerson JA, Gerlach AF. Food environment in secondary schools: a la carte, vending machines, and food policies and practices. Am J Public Health 2003;93:1161-7. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.93.7.1161
  13. Neumark-Sztainer D, French SA, Hannan PJ, Story M, Fulkerson JA. School lunch and snacking patterns among high school students: associations with school food environment and policies. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2005;2:14. https://doi.org/10.1186/1479-5868-2-14
  14. Bere E, Veierod MB, Klepp KI. The Norwegian School Fruit Programme: evaluating paid vs. no-cost subscriptions. Prev Med 2005;41:463-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2004.11.024
  15. Department of Health [Internet]. Nutritional Guidelines on School Lunch or Snacks for Primary School Students. Hong Kong: Department of Health; 2006 [cited 2008 November 28]. Available from: http://sc.eatsmart.gov.hk/gb/school.eatsmart.gov.hk/eng/template/index.asp?pid=0&id=316.
  16. Department of Health and Department for Children, Schools and Families. Healthy Weight, Healthy Lives: a Cross-Government Strategy for England. London: Department of Health and Department for Children, Schools and Families; 2008.
  17. Department of Health and Department for Education and Skills [Internet]. Food in School Primary Training Program. London: Department of Health and Department for Education and Skills; 2008 [cited 2008 November 28]. Available from: http://www.foodinschools.org/index.php.
  18. Health Promotion Board [Internet]. The Model School Tuck Shop Programme. Singapore: Health Promotion Board; 2008 [cited 2008 November 28]. Available from: http://www.hpb.gov.sg/hpb/default.asp?pg_id=1709.
  19. New South Wales Department of Education & Training. Fresh Tastes NSW Healthy School Canteen Strategy. Sydney: New South Wales Department of Education & Training; 2006.
  20. Health Promotion Division. Fruit Tuck Shops in Primary Schools. Wales: Health Promotion Division; 2008.
  21. WHO Regional Office for Europe. Food and Nutrition Policy for Schools. A Tool for the Development of School Nutrition Programmes in the European Region. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2006.
  22. Moe J, Roberts J, Moore L. Planning and running fruit tuck shops in primary schools. Health Educ 2001;101:61-8. https://doi.org/10.1108/09654280110384801
  23. Moore L, Tapper K. The impact of school fruit tuck shops and school food policies on children's fruit consumption: a cluster randomised trial of schools in deprived areas. J Epidemiol Community Health 2008;62:926-31. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.2007.070953
  24. Division of Health Promotion. Improving the Environment for Healthy Foods, a Pilot Study of Healthy Tuckshop. Seoul: Division of Health Promotion; 2008.
  25. Korea Food and Drug Administration. The Nutrition Standards for High-Calorie Foods with Low Nutritional Value. Seoul: Korea Food and Drug Administration; 2009.
  26. Klepp KI, Perez-Rodrigo C, De Bourdeaudhuij I, Due PP, Elmadfa I, Haraldsdottir J, Konig J, Sjostrom M, Thorsdottir I, Vaz de Almeida MD, Yngve A, Brug J. Promoting fruit and vegetable consumption among European schoolchildren: rationale, conceptualization and design of the pro children project. Ann Nutr Metab 2005;49:212-20. https://doi.org/10.1159/000087245
  27. Lester I. Australia's Food and Nutrition. Cat. No. ABS 8904.0. Canberra: AIHW, Australian Institute of Heatlh and Welfare; 1994.
  28. Bere E, Veierod MB, Bjelland M, Klepp KI. Outcome and process evaluation of a Norwegian school-randomized fruit and vegetable intervention: Fruits and Vegetables Make the Marks (FVMM). Health Educ Res 2006;21:258-67.
  29. Brug J, Yngve A, Klepp KI. The pro children study: conceptualization, baseline results and intervention development of a European effort to promote fruit and vegetable consumption in schoolchildren. Ann Nutr Metab 2005;49:209-11. https://doi.org/10.1159/000087244
  30. Bere E, Klepp KI. Correlates of fruit and vegetable intake among Norwegian schoolchildren: parental and self-reports. Public Health Nutr 2004;7:991-8.
  31. Bere E, Klepp KI. Changes in accessibility and preferences predict children's future fruit and vegetable intake. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2005;2:15. https://doi.org/10.1186/1479-5868-2-15
  32. Cullen KW, Baranowski T, Owens E, Marsh T, Rittenberry L, de Moor C. Availability, accessibility, and preferences for fruit, 100% fruit juice, and vegetables influence children's dietary behavior. Health Educ Behav 2003;30:615-26. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198103257254
  33. Neumark-Sztainer D, Wall M, Perry C, Story M. Correlates of fruit and vegetable intake among adolescents. Findings from Project EAT. Prev Med 2003;37:198-208. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0091-7435(03)00114-2
  34. Epstein LH, Gordy CC, Raynor HA, Beddome M, Kilanowski CK, Paluch R. Increasing fruit and vegetable intake and decreasing fat and sugar intake in families at risk for childhood obesity. Obes Res 2001;9:171-8. https://doi.org/10.1038/oby.2001.18
  35. Anderson AS, Porteous LE, Foster E, Higgins C, Stead M, Hetherington M, Ha MA, Adamson AJ. The impact of a schoolbased nutrition education intervention on dietary intake and cognitive and attitudinal variables relating to fruits and vegetables. Public Health Nutr 2005;8:650-6.
  36. Blanchette L, Brug J. Determinants of fruit and vegetable consumption among 6-12-year-old children and effective interventions to increase consumption. J Hum Nutr Diet 2005;18:431-43. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-277X.2005.00648.x
  37. Shepherd J, Harden A, Rees R, Brunton G, Garcia J, Oliver S, Oakley A. Young people and healthy eating: a systematic review of research on barriers and facilitators. Health Educ Res 2006;21:239-57.
  38. Nicklas TA, O'Neil CE. Process of conducting a 5-a-day intervention with high school students: Gimme 5 (Louisiana). Health Educ Behav 2000;27:201-12. https://doi.org/10.1177/109019810002700206
  39. Perez-Rodrigo C, Aranceta J. School-based nutrition education: lessons learned and new perspectives. Public Health Nutr 2001;4:131-9.

Cited by

  1. Use of School Tuck-shop and Desire for Healthy Tuck-shop among High School Students in Daejeon Metropolitan City According to Snack Frequency vol.22, pp.5, 2013, https://doi.org/10.5934/kjhe.2013.22.5.507
  2. Do attitudes, intentions and actions of school food coordinators regarding public organic food procurement policy improve the eating environment at school? Results from the iPOPY study vol.17, pp.06, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980013001511
  3. CVD Prevention Through Policy: a Review of Mass Media, Food/Menu Labeling, Taxation/Subsidies, Built Environment, School Procurement, Worksite Wellness, and Marketing Standards to Improve Diet vol.17, pp.11, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11886-015-0658-9
  4. 건강매점 운영에 따른 청소년의 간식 섭취에 대한 인식 및 간식 구매 행태 vol.27, pp.6, 2012, https://doi.org/10.9799/ksfan.2014.27.6.1147
  5. Food Consumed by High School Students during the School Day vol.12, pp.2, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3390/nu12020485
  6. Business outcomes of healthy food service initiatives in schools: A systematic review vol.22, pp.8, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1111/obr.13264