240 likes | 333 Views
The Fixed Environment and Collegiate Health. RESEARCH MENTOR: DR. JANE JUE JOHN-PAUL JULIEN UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA JJULIEN89@GMAIL.COM. Primary goal: Perform an exploratory examination of the food environment around the University of Pennsylvania’s campus. Background.
E N D
The Fixed Environment and Collegiate Health RESEARCH MENTOR: DR. JANE JUE JOHN-PAUL JULIEN UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA JJULIEN89@GMAIL.COM
Primary goal: Perform an exploratory examination of the food environment around the University of Pennsylvania’s campus
Background US Health Trends and Nutrition
Going Up…. • Fast food consumption has increased 5 fold since 1977 • Almost half of US food spending goes towards food eaten away from home • Fast food spending has increased 900% from 1975 to 2004 • American average calorie intake has increase by 200 kcal/day from 1976 to 1996
Also Going Up… • Between 1962 and the year 2000, the number of obese Americans grew from 13% to an alarming 31% of the population. • Among Americans age 20 and older, 145.0 million are overweight or obese (BMI of 25.0 kg/m2 and higher) • According to the U.S. Surgeon General report in 2007, obesity is responsible for 300,000 deaths every year.
Previous Studies • Environment as it relates to childhood obesity (Davis and Carpenter, 2009; Nielsen et al, 2002; Duffy et al, 2007) • These studies have led to a number of troubling conclusions: • FF restaurants within ½ mile of child’s school resulted in child’s reduced consumption of fruits & vegetables, increased consumption of soda and greater chance of being overweight • Weekly consumption of fast food is related to 0.2 unit increase in BMI
Why a college campus? • Eating habits formed in college can continue throughout one’s life • Living on a college campus typically results in more away from home eating • Increased stress levels from work load, social life, and being away from home may increase the possibility of weight gain
A Brief Description • Using a highly validated food and nutrition survey, the NEMS-R tool (Glanz, 2007 ), we conducted on-site evaluations of 130 eateries (94 restaurants, 36 food trucks) around Penn’s campus • The parameters of Penn’s eating environment were determined by a student survey • Restaurants and food carts were rated on a number of characteristics, all of which had some bearing on their nutritional rating
The Nutrition Environment Measures Survey • The NEMS-R tool takes into account the following: • Restaurant type • Restaurant hours • Seating capacity • Signs and Promotions • Menu • Availability of low fat options • Availability of 100% fruit juice, low fat milk, fresh fruits an vegetables • Healthy entree options • Main dish salad options • Factors that encourage healthy and unhealthy eating habits • Other factors
Results Graphical Analysis
Restaurant Type SD Sit-Down Restaurant 21% FC Fast Casual Restaurant 20% FF Fast Food 41% SP Specialty 18%
Nutritional Information Restaurants Yes (5) 5% No (89) 95% Food Trucks Yes (0) 0% No (36) 100%
Healthy Entrees Restaurants No (81) 86% Yes (13) 14% Food Trucks No (35) 97% Yes (1) 3%
MinimumDelivery Charge (Restaurants) No (69)73% Yes (25) 27%
Scoring NEMS-R tool rated on a -27 to 63 point scale The higher the score the more healthful the restaurant Points awarded for survey characteristics R: 14.093; FT:5.89; Overall: 11.81
Scoring Continued Restaurants Worst Score:(-3) Cupcake and Cookies Café Best Score: (39); ABP & Potbelly Sandwich Food Truck Best Score: (18); Lyn’s Food Truck
The Difficulty with Eating Healthy • Availability of healthful entrees are few and far between • Few eateries provide nutritional information for their foods • The pricing and promotions of restaurants are encouraging overeating • Eateries around Penn’s campus lack healthful value
Relevance • Better eating behaviors of adults while in college may improve individual and population health. • Nutritional characteristics of campus restaurants will allow students to make better informed eating decisions • Help colleges and universities become more cognizant of their eating environments and which establishments they support
Lessons Learned • Personal - Time Management • Project- It’s not easy being healthy • SUMR- Health services research is a field • Career – Many doors
SpecialThanks Dr. Jane Jue To LDI, Joanne Levy, Kelly Johnson, Shanta Layton SUMR scholars
References • Technomic Foodservice Segment Time Series: Limited Service Restaurants (1975–2005). Chicago, Ill: Technomic Inc; 2004. • Nielsen SJ, Siega-Riz AM, Popkin BM. Trends in food locations and sources among adolescents and young adults. Prev Med. 2002;35:107–113. • Clauson A. Share of food spending for eating out reaches 47 percent. Food Rev. 1999;22:20–22. • Bowman SA, Gortmaker SL, Ebbeling CA, Pereira MA, Ludwig DS. Effects of fast-food consumption on energy intake and diet quality among children in a national household survey. Pediatrics. 2004;113:112–118. • Nielsen S, Siega-Riz A, Popkin B. Trends in energy intake in the U.S. between 1977 and 1996: similar shifts seen across age groups. Obes Res 2002;10:370–8. • K. Glanz, J. Sallis, B. Saelens, L. Frank. Nutrition Environment Measures Survey in Stores (NEMS-S) Development and Evaluation. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Volume 32, Issue 4, Pages 282-289. • Cassady D, Housemann R, Dagher C, Measuring Cues for Healthy Choices on Restaurant Menus: Development and Testing of a Measurement Instrument, Am J of Health Promotion. 2004;6:444-449 • Dietary Guidelines for Americans, USDA Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion.