Premium
Deprivation and healthy food access, cost and availability: a cross‐sectional study
Author(s) -
Williamson S.,
McGregorShenton M.,
Brumble B.,
Wright B.,
Pettinger C.
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
journal of human nutrition and dietetics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.951
H-Index - 70
eISSN - 1365-277X
pISSN - 0952-3871
DOI - 10.1111/jhn.12489
Subject(s) - medicine , cross sectional study , healthy food , environmental health , food science , pathology , chemistry
Abstract Background Food access, cost and availability have been identified as determinants of dietary choice. It has been suggested that these are socio‐economically patterned; however, the evidence is inconclusive. The present study investigated whether differences exist with respect to healthy food access, cost and availability between areas of contrasting deprivation. Methods An ecological, cross‐sectional study was conducted in two of the most and two of the least deprived wards in Plymouth. Food retail outlets ( FRO s) ( n = 38) were identified and mapped using Geographic Information Systems to assess ‘physical access’, by foot, to food retail provision. Healthy food basket ( HFB ) surveys were conducted ( n = 32) to compare the cost and availability of 28 healthy food items between the more and less deprived areas. Results Areas of poor access to food retail provision were identified in both study areas, with a higher number of households in the more‐deprived areas being affected than in the less‐deprived areas, after accounting for car ownership levels. Median [IQR] HFB availability was lower in more‐deprived than the less‐deprived areas (48%, [39‐71%] vs. 75%, [68‐82%]; P=0.003), and in convenience stores than supermarkets (54%, [43‐72%] vs. 78%, [72‐96%]; P=0.001). Descriptive summaries revealed negligible differences in total median HFB cost between the more‐deprived and less‐deprived areas (£55.97 versus £55.94) and a larger cost difference between convenience stores and supermarkets (£62.39 versus £44.25). Conclusions Differences were found with respect to healthy food access, cost and availability in areas of contrasting deprivation. These appeared to be related to FRO type rather than deprivation alone.