Re-Imagining School Feeding : A High-Return Investment in Human Capital and Local Economies

Analysis shows that a quality education, combined with a guaranteed package of health and nutrition interventions at school, such as school feeding, can contribute to child and adolescent development and build human capital. School feeding programs can help get children into school and help them stay there, increasing enrollment and reducing absenteeism. Once children are in the classroom, these programs can contribute to their learning by avoiding hunger and enhancing cognitive abilities. The benefits are especially great for the poorest and most disadvantaged children. As highlighted in the World Bank’s 2018 World Development Report (World Bank 2018), countries need to prioritize learning, not just schooling. Children must be healthy, not hungry, if they are to match learning opportunities with the ability to learn. In the most vulnerable communities, nutrition-sensitive school meals can offer children a regular source of nutrients that are essential for their mental and physical development. And for the growing number of countries with a “double burden” of undernutrition and emerging obesity problems, well-designed school meals can help set children on the path toward more healthy diets. In Latin America, for example, where there is a growing burden of noncommunicable diseases (NCDs), school feeding programs are a key intervention in reducing undernutrition and promoting healthy diet choices. Mexico’s experience reducing sugary beverages in school cafeterias, for example, was found to be beneficial in advancing a healthy lifestyle. A large trial of school-based interventions in China also found that nutritional or physical activity interventions alone are not as effective as a joint program that combines nutritional and educational interventions. In poor communities, economic benefits from school feeding programs are also evident—reducing poverty by boosting income for households and communities as a whole. For families, the value of meals in school is equivalent to about 10 percent of a household’s income. For families with several children, that can mean substantial savings. As a result, school feeding programs are often part of social safety nets in poor countries, and they can be a stable way to reliably target pro-poor investments into communities, as well as a system that can be scaled up rapidly to respond to crises. There are also direct economic benefits for smallholder farmers in the community. Buying local food creates stable markets, boosting local agriculture, impacting rural transformation, and strengthening local food systems. In Brazil, for example, 30 percent of all purchases for school feeding come from smallholder agriculture (Drake and others 2016). These farmers are oftentimes parents with schoolchildren, helping them break intergenerational cycles of hunger and poverty. Notably, benefits to households and communities offer important synergies. The economic growth in poor communities helps provide stability and better-quality education and health systems that promote human capital. At the same time, children and adolescents grow up to enjoy better employment and social opportunities as their communities grow

Evaluation of a quality improvement intervention to reduce anastomotic leak following right colectomy (EAGLE): pragmatic, batched stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized trial in 64 countries

Background Anastomotic leak affects 8 per cent of patients after right colectomy with a 10-fold increased risk of postoperative death. The EAGLE study aimed to develop and test whether an international, standardized quality improvement intervention could reduce anastomotic leaks. Methods The internationally intended protocol, iteratively co-developed by a multistage Delphi process, comprised an online educational module introducing risk stratification, an intraoperative checklist, and harmonized surgical techniques. Clusters (hospital teams) were randomized to one of three arms with varied sequences of intervention/data collection by a derived stepped-wedge batch design (at least 18 hospital teams per batch). Patients were blinded to the study allocation. Low- and middle-income country enrolment was encouraged. The primary outcome (assessed by intention to treat) was anastomotic leak rate, and subgroup analyses by module completion (at least 80 per cent of surgeons, high engagement; less than 50 per cent, low engagement) were preplanned. Results A total 355 hospital teams registered, with 332 from 64 countries (39.2 per cent low and middle income) included in the final analysis. The online modules were completed by half of the surgeons (2143 of 4411). The primary analysis included 3039 of the 3268 patients recruited (206 patients had no anastomosis and 23 were lost to follow-up), with anastomotic leaks arising before and after the intervention in 10.1 and 9.6 per cent respectively (adjusted OR 0.87, 95 per cent c.i. 0.59 to 1.30; P = 0.498). The proportion of surgeons completing the educational modules was an influence: the leak rate decreased from 12.2 per cent (61 of 500) before intervention to 5.1 per cent (24 of 473) after intervention in high-engagement centres (adjusted OR 0.36, 0.20 to 0.64; P < 0.001), but this was not observed in low-engagement hospitals (8.3 per cent (59 of 714) and 13.8 per cent (61 of 443) respectively; adjusted OR 2.09, 1.31 to 3.31). Conclusion Completion of globally available digital training by engaged teams can alter anastomotic leak rates. Registration number: NCT04270721 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov)