Household food insecurity positively associated with increased hospital charges for infants

Objective: To test whether household food insecurity (HFI) was associated with total annual hospitalization charges, annual days hospitalized, and charges per day, among low-income infants (months) with any non-neonatal hospital stays. Methods: Administrative inpatient hospital charge data were matched to survey data from infants\u27 caregivers interviewed 1998-2005 in emergency departments in Boston and Little Rock. All study infants had been hospitalized at least once since birth; infants whose diagnoses were not plausibly related to nutrition were excluded from both groups. Log-transformed hospitalization charges were analyzed, controlling for site fixed effects. Results: 24% of infants from food-insecure households and 16% from food-secure households were hospitalized \u3e2 times (P=0.02). Mean annual inpatient hospital charges ($6,707 vs$5,735; P Conclusion: HFI was positively associated with annual inpatient charges among hospitalized low income infants. Average annual inpatient charges were almost $2,000 higher (inflation adjusted) for infants living in food-insecure households. Reducing or eliminating food insecurity could reduce health services utilization and expenditures for infants in low-income families, most of whom are covered by public health insurance

Trends in Household and Child Food Insecurity Among Families with Young Children from 2007 to 2013

Background: 2007-2013 spanned an economic downturn with rising food costs. While Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits increased during those years by 13.6% from the 2009 American Recovery Reinvestment Act (ARRA), the impact of these competing conditions on household food insecurity (HFI, household food insecure but child food secure) and child food insecurity (CFI, household and child food insecure) in households with infants and toddlers has not been investigated. Objective: To describe HFI and CFI in households participating in SNAP vs. households likely eligible but not participating (No SNAP). Design: Repeat cross-sectional Participants/Setting: 19,999 caregivers of childrenChildren’s HealthWatch survey in emergency and primary care departments in 5 US cities. Main Outcome Measures: The 18-item U.S. Household Food Security Survey (HFSS) measured HFI (≥3 affirmative responses on non-child-specific questions) and CFI (≥2 affirmative responses to eight child-specific questions). Statistical analyses performed: The sample was stratified by SNAP/ No SNAP. Multinomial logistic regression analyses examined the association between SNAP receipt and HFI and CFI. Results: Across the study period, controlling for confounders including year, households with SNAP were 17% less likely to experience HFI (AOR 0.83; 95% CI,0 .75, 0.91; p Conclusions: Receipt of SNAP vs. No SNAP was associated with decreased prevalence of HFI and CFI during much of the economic downturn; this impact waned as the buying power of the boost in benefit amounts during the ARRA period eroded

Storing Empty Calories and Chronic Disease Risk: Snack-Food Products, Nutritive Content, and Manufacturers in Philadelphia Corner Stores

Corner stores are part of the urban food environment that may contribute to obesity and diet-related diseases, particularly for low-income and minority children. The snack foods available in corner stores may be a particularly important aspect of an urban child’s food environment. Unfortunately, there is little data on exactly what snack foods corner stores stock, or where these foods come from. We evaluated snack foods in 17 Philadelphia corner stores, located in three ethnically distinct, low-income school neighborhoods. We recorded the manufacturer, calories, fat, sugar, and sodium for all snack items, excluding candy and prepared foods. We then compared the nutritive content of assessed snack items to established dietary recommendations and a school nutrition standard. In total, stores stocked 452 kinds of snacks, with only 15% of items common between all three neighborhoods. Total and unique snacks and snack food manufacturers varied by neighborhood, but distributions in snack type varied negligibly: overall, there were no fruit snacks, no vegetable snacks, and only 3.6% of all snacks (by liberal definition) were whole grain. The remainder (96.4% of snacks) was highly processed foods. Five of 65 manufacturers supplied 73.4% of all kinds of snack foods. Depending on serving size definition, 80.0-91.5% of snack foods were “unhealthy” (by the school nutrition standard), including seven of 11 wholegrain products. A single snack item could supply 6-14% of a day’s recommended calories, fat, sugar, and sodium on average (or 56-169% at the extreme) for a “typical” child. We conclude that corner store snack food inventories are almost entirely unhealthful, and we discuss possible implications and next steps for research and intervention