Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2016 Jun:159:83-91.
doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.04.015. Epub 2016 Apr 16.

Economic evaluation of price discounts and skill-building strategies on purchase and consumption of healthy food and beverages: The SHELf randomized controlled trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Economic evaluation of price discounts and skill-building strategies on purchase and consumption of healthy food and beverages: The SHELf randomized controlled trial

Ha N D Le et al. Soc Sci Med. 2016 Jun.

Abstract

Objective: Pricing strategies are a promising approach for promoting healthier dietary choices. However, robust evidence of the cost-effectiveness of pricing manipulations on dietary behaviour is limited. We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of a 20% price reduction on fruits and vegetables and a combined skills-based behaviour change and price reduction intervention.

Design and methods: Cost-effectiveness analysis from a societal perspective was undertaken for the randomized controlled trial Supermarket Healthy Eating for Life (SHELf). Female shoppers in Melbourne, Australia were randomized to: (1) skill-building (n = 160); (2) price reductions (n = 161); (3) combined skill-building and price reduction (n = 161); or (4) control group (n = 161). The intervention was implemented for three months followed by a six month follow-up. Costs were measured in 2012 Australian dollars. Fruit and vegetable purchasing and consumption were measured in grams/week.

Results: At three months, compared to control participants, price reduction participants increased vegetable purchases by 233 g/week (95% CI 4 to 462, p = 0.046) and fruit purchases by 364 g/week (95% CI 95 to 633, p = 0.008). Participants in the combined group purchased 280 g/week more fruits (95% CI 27 to 533, p = 0.03) than participants in the control group. Increases were not maintained six-month post intervention. No effect was noticed in the skill-building group. Compared to the control group, the price reduction intervention cost an additional A$2.3 per increased serving of vegetables purchased per week or an additional A$3 per increased serving of fruit purchased per week. The combined intervention cost an additional A$12 per increased serving of fruit purchased per week compared to the control group.

Conclusions: A 20% discount on fruits and vegetables was effective in promoting overall fruit and vegetable purchases during the period the discount was active and may be cost-effective. The price discount program gave better value for money than the combined price reduction and skill-building intervention. The SHELf trial is registered with Current Controlled Trials Registration ISRCTN39432901.

Keywords: Australia; Cost; Cost-effectiveness; Economic evaluation; Fruit and vegetables; Price discounts; Skill-building.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources