FreshRSS

🔒
❌ Acerca de FreshRSS
Hay nuevos artículos disponibles. Pincha para refrescar la página.
AnteayerTus fuentes RSS

Point-of-choice kilocalorie labelling practices in large, out-of-home food businesses: a preobservational versus post observational study of labelling practices following implementation of The Calorie Labelling (Out of Home Sector) (England) Regulations 2

Por: Polden · M. · Jones · A. · Essman · M. · Adams · J. · Bishop · T. · Burgoine · T. · Donohue · A. · Sharp · S. · White · M. · Smith · R. · Robinson · E.
Background and objectives

On 6 April 2022, the UK government implemented mandatory kilocalorie (kcal) labelling regulations for food and drink products sold in the out-of-home food sector (OHFS) in England. Previous assessments of kcal labelling practices in the UK OHFS found a low prevalence of voluntary implementation and poor compliance with labelling recommendations. This study aimed to examine changes in labelling practices preimplementation versus post implementation of mandatory labelling regulations in 2022.

Methods

In August–December 2021 (preimplementation) and August–November 2022 (post implementation), large OHFS businesses (250 or more employees) subject to labelling regulations were visited. At two time points, a researcher visited the same 117 food outlets (belonging to 90 unique businesses) across four local authorities in England. Outlets were rated for compliance with government regulations for whether kcal labelling was provided at any or all point of choice, provided for all eligible food and drink items, provided per portion for sharing items, if labelling was clear and legible and if kcal reference information was displayed.

Results

There was a significant increase (21% preimplementation vs 80% post implementation, OR=40.98 (95% CI 8.08 to 207.74), p

Conclusion

The number of large businesses in the OHFS providing kcal labelling increased following the implementation of mandatory labelling regulations. However, around one-fifth of eligible outlets sampled were not providing kcal labelling 4–8 months after the regulations came into force, and the majority of businesses only partially complied with government guidance. More effective enforcement may be required to further improve kcal labelling practices in the OHFS in England.

Preregistration

Study protocol and analysis strategy preregistered on Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/pfnm6/).

Stakeholders perspectives on clinical trial acceptability and approach to consent within a limited timeframe: a mixed methods study

Por: Deja · E. · Donohue · C. · Semple · M. G. · Woolfall · K. · for the BESS Investigators · Semple · McNamara · Allen · Fowler · Barker · Peak · Miert · Best · Donohue · Jones · Moitt · Price · Williamson · Clark · Madsen · Dawson · Summers · Deja · Woolfall · Osaghae · Turner · Panchal
Objectives

The Bronchiolitis Endotracheal Surfactant Study (BESS) is a randomised controlled trial to determine the efficacy of endo-tracheal surfactant therapy for critically ill infants with bronchiolitis. To explore acceptability of BESS, including approach to consent within a limited time frame, we explored parent and staff experiences of trial involvement in the first two bronchiolitis seasons to inform subsequent trial conduct.

Design

A mixed-method embedded study involving a site staff survey, questionnaires and interviews with parents approached about BESS.

Setting

Fourteen UK paediatric intensive care units.

Participants

Of the 179 parents of children approached to take part in BESS, 75 parents (of 69 children) took part in the embedded study. Of these, 55/69 (78%) completed a questionnaire, and 15/69 (21%) were interviewed. Thirty-eight staff completed a questionnaire.

Results

Parents and staff found the trial acceptable. All constructs of the Adapted Theoretical Framework of Acceptability were met. Parents viewed surfactant as being low risk and hoped their child’s participation would help others in the future. Although parents supported research without prior consent in studies of time critical interventions, they believed there was sufficient time to consider this trial. Parents recommended that prospective informed consent should continue to be sought for BESS. Many felt that the time between the consent process and intervention being administered took too long and should be ‘streamlined’ to avoid delays in administration of trial interventions. Staff described how the training and trial processes worked well, yet patients were missed due to lack of staff to deliver the intervention, particularly at weekends.

Conclusion

Parents and staff supported BESS trial and highlighted aspects of the protocol, which should be refined, including a streamlined informed consent process. Findings will be useful to inform proportionate approaches to consent in future paediatric trials where there is a short timeframe for consent discussions.

Trial registration number

ISRCTN11746266.

❌