Search results

The Victorian Salt Reduction Partnership (VicSalt Partnership) was launched in 2015, bringing together health and research organisations to develop an action plan for salt reduction interventions at a state level. A comprehensive evaluation was designed to assess the impact of the resulting four-year intervention strategy. As part of the process evaluation, semi-structured interviews were undertaken with stakeholders in March–May 2017, to understand perceived barriers and enablers to effective strategy implementation. Data were coded in relation to the key topic areas of the interviews with an inductive method used to analyse themes within topics. Seventeen stakeholders were contacted, 14 completed an interview; five from state government or statutory agencies, four from non-government funded organisations, four from research organisations and one from the food industry. Twelve were members of the VicSalt Partnership and two were informal collaborators. Most stakeholders viewed the VicSalt Partnership as a positive example of working collaboratively, and said this was essential for raising awareness of the importance of salt reduction with consumers, the food industry, and the government. Challenges relating to engaging the food industry and federal government through a state-led initiative were identified. New approaches to overcome this, such as forming clear "asks" to government and committing industry to "pledges" on reformulation were suggested. Stakeholder interviews and qualitative analysis have provided a range of important insights into barriers and enablers, many of which have already been used to strengthen intervention implementation. The evaluation of the VicSalt Partnership is ongoing and the program is expected to provide a wealth of lessons for state-led interventions to reduce salt intake in Australia and globally.

BACKGROUND: Interventions to reduce population salt intake are feasible and cost-effective. The Victorian Salt Reduction Partnership implemented a complex, multi-faceted salt reduction intervention between 2014 and 2020 in the Australian state of Victoria. This study aimed to understand stakeholder perspectives on the effectiveness of the Victorian Salt Reduction Partnership. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with Partnership and food industry stakeholders. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was adapted for the Partnership intervention and used to guide the qualitative analysis. RESULTS: Fourteen Partnership and seven food industry stakeholders were interviewed. The Partnership was viewed as essential for intervention planning and decision-making and an enabler for intervention delivery. The goals of capacity building and collaborative action were perceived to have been achieved. The implementation team executed intended intervention activities and outputs, with some adaptations to strategy. Barriers and enablers to implementation were identified by interviewees, such as compatibility of individual, organisational and Partnership values and building positive relationships between the Partnership and food industry, respectively. Legal, political, social, environmental, technological and economic factors affecting intervention design, delivery and outcomes were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Establishing a Partnership with diverse skills and experience facilitated collaborative action, capacity building and execution of the intervention. Monitoring and evaluating implementation informed strategy adaptations, which allowed optimisation of Partnership strategy. The importance of developing strong communication networks between strategic and implementation-levels was a key lesson.

High sodium intake increases blood pressure and consequently increases the risk of cardiovascular diseases. In Australia, the best estimate of sodium intake is 3840 mg sodium/day, almost double the World Health Organization (WHO) guideline (2000 mg/day), and processed meats contribute approximately 10% of daily sodium intake to the diet. This study assessed the median sodium levels of 2510 processed meat products, including bacon and sausages, available in major Australian supermarkets in 2010, 2013, 2015 and 2017, and assessed changes over time. The median sodium content of processed meats in 2017 was 775 mg/100 g (interquartile range (IQR) 483–1080). There was an 11% reduction in the median sodium level of processed meats for which targets were set under the government's Food and Health Dialogue (p < 0.001). This includes bacon, ham/cured meat products, sliced luncheon meat and meat with pastry categories. There was no change in processed meats without a target (median difference 6%, p = 0.450). The new targets proposed by the current government's Healthy Food Partnership capture a larger proportion of products than the Food and Health Dialogue (66% compared to 35%) and a lower proportion of products are at or below the target (35% compared to 54%). These results demonstrate that voluntary government targets can drive nutrient reformulation. Future efforts will require strong government leadership and robust monitoring and evaluation systems.

BACKGROUND: Australians are consuming almost double the recommended maximum salt intake. The Victorian Salt Reduction Partnership was established to coordinate efforts to reduce salt intake in the state of Victoria. As part of an intervention strategy, media advocacy strategies were used to raise public awareness and stimulate industry and government action on salt reduction. This study aimed to evaluate the Victorian Salt Reduction Partnership's media advocacy activities by determining the extent to which activities contributed to the overall strategy aims and the effectiveness of the activities in gaining media and industry engagement. METHODS: A framework for evaluating media advocacy strategies used in complex public health interventions was used to guide this evaluation. Media advocacy activities were monitored and documented throughout the intervention period. A content analysis of media release press statements was performed. Indicators of media coverage (media items, cumulative audience reach, advertising space rate) and food industry engagement (number of meetings, number and type of follow up actions) were tracked. RESULTS: Six media releases were issued between March 2017 and November 2018 on different processed food categories including breads, cooking sauces, ready meals, dips and crackers, processed meats and Asian-style sauces. Three main themes were identified in the qualitative analysis of the press statements: general information on salt and health, salt levels in foods, and calls to action for consumers, industry and/or government. These themes were aligned with the overall intervention strategy. Media items (print and online news, radio and TV) generated by each release ranged from 36 to 274, and cumulative audience reach (opportunities to see) ranged from 2.3 to 7.5 million Australians per release. One to three food manufacturers were met with per media release. CONCLUSIONS: Disseminating sodium-monitoring data through media releases can be used as a tool to gain access to the media and ...

BACKGROUND: Institutions are a recommended setting for dietary interventions and nutrition policies as these provide an opportunity to improve health by creating healthy food environments. In Australia, state and territory governments encourage or mandate institutions in their jurisdiction to adopt nutrition policies. However, no work has analysed the policy design across settings and jurisdictions. This study aimed to compare the design and components of government-led institutional nutrition policies between Australian states and territories, determine gaps in existing policies, and assess the potential for developing stronger, more comprehensive policies. METHODS: Government-led institutional nutrition policies, in schools, workplaces, health facilities and other public settings, were identified by searching health and education department websites for each Australian state and territory government. This was supplemented by data from other relevant stakeholder websites and from the Food Policy Index Australia website. A framework for monitoring and evaluating nutrition policies in publicly-funded institutions was used to extract data and a qualitative analysis of the design and content of institutional nutrition policies was performed. Comparative analyses between the jurisdictions and institution types were conducted, and policies were assessed for comprehensiveness. RESULTS: Twenty-seven institutional nutrition policies were identified across eight states and territories in Australia. Most policies in health facilities and public schools were mandatory, though most workplace policies were voluntary. Twenty-four included nutrient criteria, and 22 included guidelines for catering/fundraising/advertising. While most included implementation guides or tools and additional supporting resources, less than half included tools/timelines for monitoring and evaluation. The policy design, components and nutrient criteria varied between jurisdictions and institution types, though all were based on the Australian Dietary ...

Background: Institutions are a recommended setting for dietary interventions and nutrition policies as these provide an opportunity to improve health by creating healthy food environments. In Australia, state and territory governments encourage or mandate institutions in their jurisdiction to adopt nutrition policies. However, no work has analysed the policy design across settings and jurisdictions. This study aimed to compare the design and components of government-led institutional nutrition policies between Australian states and territories, determine gaps in existing policies, and assess the potential for developing stronger, more comprehensive policies. Methods: Government-led institutional nutrition policies, in schools, workplaces, health facilities and other public settings, were identified by searching health and education department websites for each Australian state and territory government. This was supplemented by data from other relevant stakeholder websites and from the Food Policy Index Australia website. A framework for monitoring and evaluating nutrition policies in publicly-funded institutions was used to extract data and a qualitative analysis of the design and content of institutional nutrition policies was performed. Comparative analyses between the jurisdictions and institution types were conducted, and policies were assessed for comprehensiveness. Results: Twenty-seven institutional nutrition policies were identified across eight states and territories in Australia. Most policies in health facilities and public schools were mandatory, though most workplace policies were voluntary. Twenty-four included nutrient criteria, and 22 included guidelines for catering/fundraising/advertising. While most included implementation guides or tools and additional supporting resources, less than half included tools/timelines for monitoring and evaluation. The policy design, components and nutrient criteria varied between jurisdictions and institution types, though all were based on the Australian Dietary Guidelines. Conclusions: Nutrition policies in institutions present an opportunity to create healthy eating environments and improve population health in Australia. However, the design of these policies, including lack of key components such as accountability mechanisms, and jurisdictional differences, may be a barrier to implementation and prevent the policies having their intended impact.