首页> 外文OA文献 >Implementation of Ontario’s School Food and Beverage Policy (P/PM 150) in Peel Region: A Qualitative Evaluation
【2h】

Implementation of Ontario’s School Food and Beverage Policy (P/PM 150) in Peel Region: A Qualitative Evaluation

机译:在皮尔地区实施安大略省学校食品和饮料政策(P / PM 150):定性评估

摘要

INTRODUCTION: With obesity rates rising in Canada, schools have been identified as an ideal setting for health promotion interventions. Across the world, school nutrition policies have been implemented to try and improve the diets and food behaviours of youth; however, policies differ greatly in their design and implementation. While some policies are considered voluntary (where schools are given a guideline with which to create their own policies), the Ontario Ministry of Education’s School Food and Beverage Policy (P/PM 150) was mandated as of September 2011 for all schools in Ontario. Many factors have been identified as facilitators and barriers to school nutrition policy implementation across settings. Additionally, recommendations have been provided in terms of ‘best practices’ for school nutrition policy implementation. It is important to understand why school nutrition policy implementation works better in some contexts compared to others. PURPOSE: The purpose of the research was to: i) describe the school food context (including student food behaviours and influences on those behaviours) in Region of Peel schools; ii) examine, from the perspectives of multiple stakeholders, the process of P/PM 150 implementation; including perceived challenges / successes with policy implementation, and its impacts; iii) analyze the results in relation to the constructs of Damschroder’s Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.METHODS: This qualitative study consisted of 5 food service provider interviews, 15 school stakeholder interviews (3 elementary, 12 secondary); 5 elementary school parent focus groups; and 11 student focus groups (7 elementary, 4 secondary). Two surveys were conducted that provided responses to open-ended questions from 46 secondary school parent surveys, and 1,251 Grade 6-10 students. Focus group, interview and open-ended survey data were analyzed using NVivo 10 qualitative analysis software. An interpretive description approach was used. Common themes were coded and patterns were found. Comparisons between participant groups were also analyzed by conducting matrix queries in NVivo 10. A second-coder analyzed a sample of transcripts and high level codes to ensure inter-rater reliability.RESULTS: In relation to the context in which the policy was introduced, participants most frequently expressed negative opinions related to food quality, low variety, and high cost of school food. The most commonly reported student behaviour was bringing their own food from home. Many factors potentially influenced students’ food behaviours, at the individual level (e.g., age, SES), social factors (e.g., parent/peer influence), and macro-level factors (e.g., weather, and community SES). Additionally, school, home and outside (of school) environments were an important factor influencing students’ food choices, as they determined what foods were available and either promoted (e.g., school health promotion activities) or discouraged healthy eating behaviours (e.g., negative role models for healthy eating). In regards to P/PM 150, participants felt that the policy promoted healthy eating, provided students’ access to healthy options, and provided a safety net for students with bad eating habits. They reported concerns regarding freedom of choice, policy content (e.g., ignored portion control, balance), and negative effects on food quality (taste, variety, affordability) and food behaviours. Some adult participants engaged in various activities (e.g. attending workshops, appointing champions) to support implementation, although activities varied widely by school. Some felt the transition was relatively easy while others described it as a larger adjustment. Participants reported a variety of resources and supports for policy implementation, such as policy booklets, workshops/ training events, P/PM 150-specific committees, and support from Public Health; while a variety of resources/supports were mentioned, not all were considered helpful. Lastly, participants described their perceived successes and challenges with implementation which related to outcomes and impacts. In terms of successes, the ability to find popular compliant choices led to positive outcomes on school food quality. That, in addition to school health promotion activities, led to positive impacts on students’ food behaviours. Regarding perceived challenges, participants felt that P/PM 150 significantly limited food choices leading to negative impacts on school food quality, variety, prices/affordability and portions. These changes led to student rebellion, and leaving school grounds to buy unhealthier options from the outside competition that were not bound by the policy. Challenges were also linked to school food revenue loss. Participants provided recommendations to the Ontario Ministry of Education that related to: a) the process of implementation (e.g., follow-up with schools, monitor compliance); b) changing the policy direction (e.g., reducing policy restrictions); and c) increasing clarity/consistency of policy messages (e.g., explaining why the policy is in place). DISCUSSION: The contextual factors found to influence school food behaviours in Peel Region schools corroborates much of what has been reported in the literature. Factors influencing P/PM 150 policy implementation were closely aligned to the constructs described in Damschroder’s Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Two additional constructs were identified that were not reflected in the framework: ‘implementation climate outside the school’ and ‘adaptability of the inner setting’. Study results indicated that these were significant factors influencing implementation in Peel Region schools. Therefore, these factors should be a considered in further revisions of the framework, in particular where it is being used to support policy implementation. CONCLUSION: Understanding the context of the real world setting including the social cultural, physical and economic environment in which a new intervention is being implemented is critically important. This thesis explored the school context in one region in Ontario from the perspective of multiple stakeholders ranging from students to the staff in the food industry. Implementation of a new school food policy (P/PM 150) was found to be complex with many factors influencing its successful uptake by school stakeholders. While participants discussed many challenges and negative outcomes and impacts resulting from P/PM 150, positive impacts on school food and food behaviours were also reported. While P/PM 150 successes were identified, results related to typical food behaviours showed that the home environment still had a significant impact on student food behaviours. Therefore, impacts of the policy could be limited without addressing other environments. Those planning to implement school food policies in the future need to consider comprehensive approaches that address potential influencing factors and environments outside of the school that impact student food behaviours.
机译:简介:随着加拿大的肥胖率上升,学校已被确定为健康促进干预措施的理想场所。在世界范围内,已经实施了学校营养政策,以试图改善青年人的饮食和饮食行为;但是,政策在设计和实施上有很大的不同。虽然有些政策被认为是自愿的(为学校提供了制定自己的政策的指导方针),但自2011年9月起,安大略省教育部的《学校食物和饮料政策》(P / PM 150)已被强制实施。许多因素被认为是在各个地区实施学校营养政策的促进因素和障碍。此外,还针对学校营养政策的实施提供了“最佳做法”方面的建议。重要的是要了解为什么在某些情况下与其他情况相比,学校营养政策的实施效果更好。目的:该研究的目的是:i)描述皮尔地区学校的学校饮食环境(包括学生的饮食行为及其对这些行为的影响); ii)从多个利益相关者的角度审查P / PM 150的实施过程;包括在政策实施过程中所面临的挑战/成功及其影响; iii)分析与Damschroder实施研究综合框架的构建有关的结果。方法:这项定性研究包括5次食品服务提供者访谈,15次学校利益相关者访谈(初中3次,初中12次); 5个小学家长焦点小组;和11个学生焦点小组(小学7个,中学4个)。进行了两项调查,这些调查提供了对46个中学家长调查和1,251名6-10年级学生的开放式问题的回答。使用NVivo 10定性分析软件分析了焦点小组,访谈和不限成员名额的调查数据。使用了解释性描述方法。对常见主题进行了编码并找到了模式。还通过在NVivo 10中进行矩阵查询来分析参与者组之间的比较。第二位编码者分析了成绩单和高级代码样本,以确保评分者之间的可靠性。结果:在引入政策的背景下,参与者最常见的负面评论涉及食品质量,品种少和学校食品成本高。据报道,最常见的学生行为是自带食物。在个人层面(例如年龄,SES),社会因素(例如父母/同伴影响)和宏观层面的因素(例如天气和社区SES),许多因素都可能影响学生的饮食行为。此外,学校,家庭和(学校)外部环境是影响学生食物选择的重要因素,因为他们确定可以买到哪些食物并促进(例如,学校健康促进活动)或阻碍健康饮食行为(例如,消极作用)健康饮食模型)。关于P / PM 150,与会人员认为该政策促进了健康饮食,为学生提供了健康选择,并为有不良饮食习惯的学生提供了安全网。他们报告了对选择自由,政策内容(例如忽视的份量控制,平衡)以及对食品质量(口味,品种,可负担性)和食品行为的负面影响的担忧。一些成人参加各种活动(例如参加讲习班,任命冠军)以支持实施,尽管活动因学校而异。一些人认为过渡相对容易,而另一些人则将其描述为较大的调整。与会者报告了各种资源和政策执行支持,例如政策手册,讲习班/培训活动,针对P / PM 150的委员会以及公共卫生的支持;尽管提到了各种资源/支持,但并不是所有资源/支持都被认为是有帮助的。最后,与会人员描述了他们在实施方面与成果和影响相关的成功和挑战。就成功而言,找到流行的合规选择的能力导致学校食品质量取得积极成果。除学校健康促进活动外,这还对学生的饮食行为产生了积极影响。关于所面临的挑战,与会人员认为P / PM 150极大地限制了食物选择,从而对学校食物质量,品种,价格/负担能力和份量产生负面影响。这些变化导致学生叛乱,并让学校有理由从外部竞争中购买不受政策约束的不健康选择。挑战也与学校食品收入损失有关。参与者向安大略省教育部提供了有关以下方面的建议:a)实施过程(例如,对学校的跟进),监控合规性); b)改变政策方向(例如减少政策限制); c)提高政策信息的清晰度/一致性(例如,解释为何制定该政策)。讨论:皮尔地区学校发现影响学校饮食行为的情境因素证实了许多文献报道。影响P / PM 150政策实施的因素与Damschroder的《实施研究合并框架》中所述的结构紧密一致。确定了框架中未体现的另外两个构架:“校外实施环境”和“内部环境的适应性”。研究结果表明,这些是影响皮尔地区学校实施的重要因素。因此,在进一步修订框架时应考虑这些因素,尤其是在将其用于支持政策实施时。结论:了解现实世界的环境,包括正在实施新干预措施的社会文化,自然和经济环境,至关重要。本文从学生和食品行业员工等多个利益相关者的角度探讨了安大略省一个地区的学校环境。人们发现,执行一项新的学校食品政策(P / PM 150)非常复杂,其中有许多因素会影响学校利益相关者对其的成功采用。虽然与会者讨论了P / PM 150带来的许多挑战,负面结果和影响,但也报告了对学校食物和食物行为的积极影响。在确定P / PM 150成功的同时,与典型饮食行为有关的结果表明,家庭环境仍然对学生的饮食行为产生重大影响。因此,可以在不解决其他环境的情况下限制策略的影响。那些计划在将来实施学校食品政策的人需要考虑综合方法,以解决影响学生食品行为的校外潜在影响因素和环境。

著录项

  • 作者

    Valaitis Renata;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2015
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 en
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号