Table 5.
Nutritional and health outcomes associated with fruit and vegetable subsidy programs
| First Author, Year Intervention, Participants | Nutritional outcomes | Health outcomes | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Burr 2007[37] |
Dietary intake |
|
|||||||
| |
Net % consuming more fruit |
|
|||||||
| Free home-delivered orange juice using vouchers(V) nutritional advice promoting fruit and fruit juice (A) or standard care during prenatal care period (C) |
Mean |
V |
A |
C |
|
|
|||
| |
Apples |
2.2 |
−13.2 |
−2.7 |
|
|
|||
| |
Oranges |
−2.2 |
−21.1 |
−11.8 |
|
|
|||
| |
Bananas |
−17.4 |
−7.9 |
−29.7 |
|
|
|||
| |
Fruit juice |
34.8* |
−7.9 |
−24.3 |
|
|
|||
| |
*Voucher group net % significantly greater than advice or control (p<0.05) |
|
|||||||
| Pregnant women |
Biomarkers |
|
|
|
|
|
|||
| |
Mean (SD) |
|
|
|
|
|
|||
| |
β-carotene change, ng/ml |
||||||||
| |
V |
A |
C |
p |
|
|
|||
| |
n=39 |
n=37 |
n=42 |
|
|
|
|||
| |
35.6(77.2) |
|
−20.2(43.3) |
<0.0001 |
|
|
|||
| |
|
2.7(65.5) |
−20.2(43.3) |
0.435 |
|
|
|||
|
Herman 2006 & 2008[32,40] |
Dietary intake |
|
|
|
|
|
|||
| Standard WIC program plus $10 voucher weekly for F&V from local supermarket (SM) or farmer′s market (FM) |
Mean |
SM |
FM |
C |
p |
|
|||
| |
F&V intake, |
|
|
|
|
|
|||
| |
serves/4186kJ/day |
|
|
|
|
|
|||
| |
End of intervention |
4.1 |
3.9 |
3.0 |
F=9.75, p<0.001 |
|
|||
| Post-partum women >18yo- all WIC participants |
6 mths post-intervention |
4.0 |
4.0 |
3.1 |
F=6.66, p=0.001 |
|
|||
| |
Vegetable intake, serves/4186kJ/day |
|
|||||||
| |
End of intervention |
2.3 |
2.1 |
1.5 |
F=11.0, p<0.001 |
|
|||
| |
6 mths post-intervention Data not shown F=−0.59, p=0.02 |
|
|||||||
| |
Fruit intake |
|
|||||||
| |
Data not shown, no significant differences between SM, FM and control |
|
|||||||
|
Kennedy 2009[41] |
Dietary intake |
|
|
|
|
Anthropometric and cardiovascular outcomes |
|||
| |
Change in intake at six months |
|
|
|
|
Change at six months |
|||
| Free fruit and vegetables $10/week with recipes from mobile store at community centre with monthly nutrition/cooking sessions and anthropometric assessment |
Mean (SD) |
I |
C |
p |
|
Mean (SD) |
I |
C |
p |
| |
Energy, kcal/day |
−456 (1032) |
−636 (1326) |
0.48 |
|
Weight, kg |
−2.0 (3.2) |
1.1 (2.0) |
<0.001 |
| |
Fiber, g/day |
1.7 (5.7) |
−4.3 (19.7) |
0.03 |
|
|
|
|
|
| African-American women |
Fruit, serves/day |
1.0 (1.7) |
0 (1.2) |
0.02 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Veg, serves/day |
0.9 (1.2) |
−0.2 (1.8) |
0.002 |
|
BMI, kg/m [2] |
−0.7 (1.2) |
0.4 (0.8) |
0.001 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Waist size, cm |
−0.5 (5.3) |
1.9 (3.7) |
0.12 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Syst BP, mmHg |
−2.3 (13.0) |
−1.4 (12.3) |
0.14 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Dias BP, mmHg |
0.8 (8.1) |
0.1 (9.3) |
0.68 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Self-rated health |
|||
| General health and quality of life were rated across multiple domains. Trends generally favoured intervention group, but only self-esteem (p=0.03) and emotional role (p=0.04) improved significantly | |||||||||