A Group Randomized Intervention Trial Increases Participation in the School Breakfast Program in 16 Rural High Schools in Minnesota

Published:February 14, 2019DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2018.12.007

      Abstract

      Background

      Breakfast consumption is associated with better diet quality and healthier weights, yet many adolescents miss breakfast. Nationally, 17.1% of students participate in the School Breakfast Program (SBP). Only 10% of high school students participate.

      Objective

      Our aim was to evaluate an environmental intervention to increase SBP participation in high schools.

      Design

      A group randomized trial was carried out from 2012 to 2015.

      Participants/setting

      Ninth- and 10th-grade students enrolled in 16 rural schools in Minnesota (median 387 students) were randomized to intervention or control condition.

      Intervention

      A school-based intervention that included two key components was implemented over a 12-month period. One component focused on increasing SBP participation by increasing student access to school breakfast through changes in school breakfast service practices (eg, serving breakfast from a grab-n-go cart in the atrium; expanding breakfast service times). The other component focused on promoting school breakfast through student-directed marketing campaigns.

      Main outcome measure

      Change in school-level participation in the SBP was assessed between baseline (among ninth and tenth graders) and follow-up (among tenth and eleventh graders). School meal and attendance records were used to assess change in school-level participation rates in the SBP.

      Statistical analyses

      The Wilcoxon test was used for analysis of difference in change in mean SBP participation rate by experimental group.

      Results

      The median change in SBP participation rate between baseline and follow-up was 3% (interquartile range=13.5%) among the eight schools in the intervention group and 0.5% (interquartile range=0.7%) among the eight schools in the control group. This difference in change between groups was statistically significant (Wilcoxon test, P=0.03). The intervention effect increased throughout the intervention period, with change in mean SBP participation rate by the end of the school year reaching 10.3% (95% CI 3.0 to 17.6). However, among the intervention schools, the change in mean SBP participation rates was highly variable (range=–0.8% to 24.8%).

      Conclusions

      Interventions designed to improve access to the SBP by reducing environmental and social barriers have potential to increase participation among high school students.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Rampersaud G.C.
        • Pereira M.A.
        • Girard B.L.
        • Adams J.
        • Metzl J.D.
        Breakfast habits, nutritional status, body weight, and academic performance in children and adolescents.
        J Am Diet Assoc. May. 2005; 105 (quiz 761-742): 743-760
        • Blondin S.A.
        • Anzman-Frasca S.
        • Djang H.C.
        • Economos C.D.
        Breakfast consumption and adiposity among children and adolescents: An updated review of the literature.
        Pediatr Obes. 2016; 11: 333-348
        • US Department of Agriculture Food and Nutrition Service
        School Nutrition Dietary Assessment Study-IV Summary of Findings.
        (Published November 2012. Accessed August 15, 2017)
        • US Department of Agriculture Food Surveys Research Group
        Breakfast in America, 2001-2002.
        • Share our Strength
        Increasing School Breakfast Participation.
        (Published 2014. Accessed August 11, 2016)
        • National Education Assocation Health Information Network
        Start School with Breakfast: A Guide to Increasing School Breakfast Participation.
        • Anzman-Frasca S.
        • Djang H.C.
        • Halmo M.M.
        • Dolan P.R.
        • Economos C.D.
        Estimating impacts of a breakfast in the classroom program on school outcomes.
        JAMA Pediatr. 2015; 169: 71-77
        • Van Wye G.
        • Seoh H.
        • Adjoian T.
        • Dowell D.
        Evaluation of the New York City breakfast in the classroom program.
        Am J Public Health. 2013; 103: e59-e64
        • Moore G.F.
        • Murphy S.
        • Chaplin K.
        • Lyons R.A.
        • Atkinson M.
        • Moore L.
        Impacts of the Primary School Free Breakfast Initiative on socio-economic inequalities in breakfast consumption among 9-11-year-old schoolchildren in Wales.
        Public Health Nutr. 2014; 17: 1280-1289
        • Ritchie L.D.
        • Rosen N.J.
        • Fenton K.
        • Au L.E.
        • Goldstein L.H.
        • Shimada T.
        School Breakfast policy is associated with dietary intake of fourth- and fifth-grade students.
        J Am Diet Assoc. 2016; 116: 449-457
        • Reddan J.
        • Wahlstrom K.
        • Reicks M.
        Children's perceived benefits and barriers in relation to eating breakfast in schools with or without Universal School Breakfast.
        J Nutr Educ Behav. 2002; 34: 47-52
        • Hoelscher D.M.
        • Moag-Stahlberg A.
        • Ellis K.
        • Vandewater E.A.
        • Malkani R.
        Evaluation of a student participatory, low-intensity program to improve school wellness environment and students' eating and activity behaviors.
        Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2016; 13: 59
        • Nanney M.S.
        • Olaleye T.M.
        • Wang Q.
        • Motyka E.
        • Klund-Schubert J.
        A pilot study to expand the school breakfast program in one middle school.
        Transl Behav Med. 2011; 1: 436-442
        • Morris C.T.
        • Courtney A.
        • Bryant C.A.
        • McDermott R.J.
        Grab N' Go breakfast at school: Observations from a pilot program.
        J Nutr Educ Behav. 2010; 42: 208-209
        • Leatherdale S.T.
        • Stefanczyk J.M.
        • Kirkpatrick S.I.
        School Breakfast-Club Program Changes and Youth Eating Breakfast During the School Week in the COMPASS Study.
        J School Health. 2016; 86: 568-577
        • Olsta J.
        Bringing breakfast to our students: A program to increase school breakfast participation.
        J School Nursing. 2013; 29: 263-270
        • Haesly B.
        • Nanney M.S.
        • Coulter S.
        • Fong S.
        • Pratt R.J.
        Impact on staff of improving access to the school breakfast program: A qualitative study.
        J School Health. 2014; 84: 267-274
        • Lutfiyya M.N.
        • Lipsky M.S.
        • Wisdom-Behounek J.
        • Inpanbutr-Martinkus M.
        Is rural residency a risk factor for overweight and obesity for U.S. children?.
        Obesity. 2007; 15: 2348-2356
        • Minnesota School Nutrition Association
        MSNA is a state organization of school nutrition professionals committed to advancing school meal programs through education and advocacy.
        https://www.mnsna.org/
        Date accessed: November 8, 2018
        • Townsend N.
        • Foster C.
        Developing and applying a socio-ecological model to the promotion of healthy eating in the school.
        Public Health Nutr. 2013; 16: 1101-1108
        • Ajzen I.
        The Theory of Planned Behavior.
        Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1991; 50: 179-211
        • Expanding Your School Breakfast Program
        (Published 2013. Accessed December 22, 2016)
        • School Nutrition Association
        Growing School Breakfast Program Participation: New Ways to Deliver Breakfast to Students on-the-Go.
        School Nutrition Association, Arlington, VA2011
        • Rainville A.
        • Carr D.
        Best Practice Guide for In-Classroom Breakfast.
        The University of Mississippi National Food Service Management Institute, Oxford, MS2008
      1. Project breakFAST: Fueling Academics and Strengthening Teens. 2018.
        • Nanney M.S.
        • Davey C.S.
        • Kubik M.Y.
        Rural disparities in the distribution of policies that support healthy eating in US secondary schools.
        J Acad Nutr Diet. 2013; 113: 1062-1068
        • Schetzina K.E.
        • Dalton 3rd, W.T.
        • Lowe E.F.
        • et al.
        Developing a coordinated school health approach to child obesity prevention in rural Appalachia: Results of focus groups with teachers, parents, and students.
        Rural Remote Health. 2009; 9: 1157
        • Schetzina K.E.
        • Dalton 3rd, W.T.
        • Lowe E.F.
        • et al.
        A coordinated school health approach to obesity prevention among Appalachian youth: The Winning with Wellness Pilot Project.
        Fam Community Health. 2009; 32: 271-285
        • Graves A.
        • Haughton B.
        • Jahns L.
        • Fitzhugh E.
        • Jones S.J.
        Biscuits, sausage, gravy, milk, and orange juice: School breakfast environment in 4 rural Appalachian schools.
        J School Health. 2008; 78: 197-202
        • Addison C.C.
        • Jenkins B.W.
        • White M.S.
        • Young L.
        Examination of the food and nutrient content of school lunch menus of two school districts in Mississippi.
        Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2006; 3: 278-285
        • Nollen N.L.
        • Befort C.
        • Davis A.M.
        • et al.
        Competitive foods in schools: Availability and purchasing in predominately rural small and large high schools.
        J Am Diet Assoc. 2009; 109: 857-864

      Biography

      M. S. Nanney was an associate professor, Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.

      Biography

      A. Shanafelt is a project coordinator, Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.

      Biography

      K. Y. Grannon is a research assistant, Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.

      Biography

      C. Caspi is an assistant professor, Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.

      Biography

      R. Leduc is a research associate, Division of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.

      Biography

      Q. Wang is a researcher, Clinical and Translational Science Institute, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.

      Biography

      L. J. Harnack is a professor, Division of Epidemiology and Community Health, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.

      Biography

      M. Hearst is an associate professor, Public Health Program, Saint Catherine University, St Paul, MN.

      Biography

      M. Schroeder is an associate extension professor, University of Minnesota Extension, Marshall.

      Biography

      M. Y. Kubik is a professor, College of Public Health, Department of Nursing, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA; at the time of the study, she was an associate professor, School of Nursing, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.