Impact of bottle size on in-home consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages: protocol for a feasibility and acceptability study

Mantzari, Eleni; Hollands, Gareth J; Pechey, Rachel; Jebb, Susan A.; Marteau, Theresa

doi:10.1186/s40814-015-0037-8

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The study design and methods have been previously published [15]. In brief, the study used a crossover design in which residential households received a set amount of cola each week for four weeks, based on their typical weekly purchasing, in bottles of one of four sizes: 1500 ml, 1000 ml, 500 ml, or 250 ml, in random order.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of bottle size on in-home consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages: a feasibility and acceptability study

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundConsumption of sugars-sweetened beverages (SSB) increases energy intake and the risk of obesity. Large packages increase consumption of food, implying that smaller bottle sizes may help curb SSB consumption, but there is a lack of relevant evidence relating to these products. This study explores the feasibility and acceptability of conducting a randomised controlled trial to assess the impact of different bottle sizes on SSB consumption at home.MethodsHouseholds in Cambridge, England, which purchased at least 2 l of regular cola drinks per week, received a set amount of cola each week for four weeks, in bottles of one of four sizes (1500 ml, 1000 ml, 500 ml, or 250 ml) in random order. The total volume received consisted of a modest excess of households’ typical weekly purchasing, but was further increased for half the study households to avoid ceiling effects. Consumption was measured by recording the number of empty bottles at the end of each week. Eligible households were invited to complete a run-in period to assess levels of active participation.ResultsThirty-seven of 111 eligible households with an interest in the study completed the run-in period. The study procedures proved feasible. The target for recruitment (n = 16 households) was exceeded. Measuring consumption was feasible: over three quarters (n = 30/37) of households returned all bottles on the majority (n = 88/101) of the study weeks completed across households. The validity of this measure was compromised by guests from outside the household who drank the study cola (n = 18/37 households on 48/101 study weeks) and consumption of the study cola outside the home. Supplying enhanced volumes of cola to nine households was associated with higher consumption (11,592 ml vs 7869 ml). The intervention and study procedures were considered acceptable. Thirteen households correctly identified the study aims.ConclusionThe findings support the feasibility and acceptability of running a randomised controlled trial to assess the impact of presenting a fixed volume of SSB in different bottle sizes on in-home consumption. However, methods that avoid consumption being influenced by the amount of cola supplied weekly by the study and that capture out of home consumption are needed before conducting a randomised controlled trial.Trial registration ISRCTN14964130; Registered on 18th May, 2015.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of bottle size on in-home consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages: a feasibility and acceptability study

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…the change-over was instantaneous with no washout. Following the procedures of a study using a similar design [26,27], at the end of each intervention fortnight, households were requested to pay for the wine they consumed, at the rate specified on the study wine list. To avoid any potential confounding impact of price on consumption with each bottle size, the amount they paid per litre was kept constant across the intervention periods.…”

Section: Stages 3 and 4: Intervention Periods-2 Weeks Each (4 Weeks Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of bottle size on in-home consumption of wine: feasibility and acceptability randomised cross-over study

Mantzari

Galloway

Hollands

et al. 2020

Pilot Feasibility Stud

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Reducing alcohol consumption across populations would prevent many non-communicable diseases. Large packages increase food and non-alcoholic drink consumption and large glasses increase wine consumption. Smaller bottles may reduce alcohol consumption but their impact is uncertain. This study aims to (i) explore the feasibility and acceptability of conducting a large-scale randomised study to assess the impact of bottle size on inhome wine consumption and (ii) estimate the effect size and variance of the intervention on consumption to inform the design of future studies. Methods: Cross-over randomised study in which 16 households in Cambridge, England, consuming at least two 750-ml bottles of wine each week, received a pre-set volume of wine biweekly for 4 weeks, in 750-ml and 375-ml bottles, in random order. Consumption was assessed by recording the number of empty and partially full bottles at the end of each biweekly period. At the end of the study, household representatives were interviewed about their experiences of participating in the study. Results: The study procedures proved feasible. Comparable to similar trials, 14% of identified eligible households (18/125) consented to participate in the study. Attrition between consent and study completion was 11% (2/18) and 0% between study periods and 13% of households (2/16) correctly identified the study aim. The study procedures were considered acceptable. After adjusting for guest and out-of-home consumption, the difference in consumption between the 750-ml (3385.2 ml; SD = 1698.5) and 375-ml bottles (3376.7 ml; SD = 1719.0) was 8.4 ml (SD = 1235.4; 95%CI − 596.9, 613.8). Results suggest a possible order effect, with households receiving the 375-ml bottles first consuming more wine out of the 750-ml bottles and vice versa. This might also reflect an increase in consumption with study duration. Households receiving the 375-ml bottles first (6315.9 ml; SD = 3293.5) also drank less wine overall than those receiving the 750-ml bottles first (7335.4 ml; SD = 3735.4). Discussion: The findings support the feasibility and acceptability of running a large-scale randomised study to assess the impact of bottle size on in-home wine consumption. Due to the heterogeneous patterning of results, a future study will be powered using the variance observed in the current study to detect a meaningful reduction of 250 ml of wine when consumed from smaller compared with larger bottles.

show abstract

“…Another indirect examination of the inequality of SB consumption in the Colombian population also showed that there is no inequality in the classical sense; this finding was related to the pattern of snack food consumption [ 32 ]. The main measures taken to reduce the consumption of sugary drinks have focuses on SB, for example, by limiting bottle sizes [ 33 ] or regulating or even prohibiting the sale of SB at school stores to make consumption difficult [ 14 – 16 ]. SB consumption taxes are justified by the excess weight of the population and its role in health events associated with chronic disease [ 6 , 34 , 35 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consumption of sweetened-beverages and poverty in Colombia: when access is not an advantage

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThis study characterizes the intake of sweetened beverages and establishes whether economic inequalities in their consumption exists.MethodsEcological study. Mixed methods using food frequency questionnaire and inequality indices. Based on the National Nutrition Survey, Colombia, 2010. The sweetened beverage intake of 17,514 subjects in 33 geodemographic units was estimated with a food frequency questionnaire and summarized. The calculation of inequality was based on the monetary poverty. The prevalence (yes/no) and frequency (times/day) of sweetened beverage consumption were estimated. Indices of economic inequality were calculated for both prevalence and frequency.ResultsThe prevalence of sweetened beverage consumption was between 79.2% (95% CI, 75.7 to 82.8) in adults and 88.5% (95% CI, 85.8 to 91.3) in minors. The frequency of consumption in terms of times/day, was between 0.20 (95% CI, 0.16 to 0.24) in adults and 0.40 (95% CI, 0.33 to 0.46) in minors. The Gini coefficient for the prevalence was close to zero, between 0.04 and 0.08; for the frequency, it was slightly higher, between 0.12 and 0.25.ConclusionsIt was established that there is no economic inequality in the consumption of sweetened beverages. Consumption taxes could be regressive.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12889-018-5037-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Impact of bottle size on in-home consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages: protocol for a feasibility and acceptability study

Cited by 5 publications

References 39 publications

Impact of bottle size on in-home consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages: a feasibility and acceptability study

Impact of bottle size on in-home consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages: a feasibility and acceptability study

Impact of bottle size on in-home consumption of wine: feasibility and acceptability randomised cross-over study

Consumption of sweetened-beverages and poverty in Colombia: when access is not an advantage

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About