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
. 2019 Dec 18:5:60.
doi: 10.1186/s40795-019-0321-8. eCollection 2019.

Mixed methods evaluation of an employer-led, free lunch initiative in Northern Ireland

Désirée Schliemann  1 , Michelle C McKinley  1 , Jayne V Woodside  1
Affiliations

Mixed methods evaluation of an employer-led, free lunch initiative in Northern Ireland

Désirée Schliemann et al. BMC Nutr. .

Abstract

Background: The objective of this study was to evaluate the acceptance of an employer-led free lunch initiative and its effect on health, diet, and attitudes towards health and diet amongst employees in a small workplace in Northern Ireland.

Methods: This was a controlled, employer-led pilot intervention, which was evaluated through a mixed methods approach.

Results: Seventeen participants from the intervention site and 14 participants from the control site completed all assessments. Post-intervention, there was no difference in change in dietary measures between the sites, except for saturated fat intake during weekdays (IS: - 1.3% of calories, SD: 4.3; CS: 2.8% of calories, SD: 6.6; P-value < 0.05). Qualitative information was summarised to highlight employees' expectations and experiences with the intervention.

Conclusion: This study highlights the challenges that need to be considered when implementing a free lunch initiative for staff.

Keywords: Diet; Diet intervention; Employees; Free lunch; Health; Interviews; Workplace.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interestsThe authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Study design and evaluation outcomes of the free lunch pilot intervention. IS- Intervention Site; CS – Control Site; ON duty – weekdays; OFF duty – weekends, WC – Waist Circumference; BMI – Body Mass Index; BP – Blood pressure. *At follow-up, two participants left the IS without giving reason. From the CS, five participants had left the company; two were following a strict diet and one dropped out without giving reason
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Lopez AD, Mathers CD, Ezzati M, Jamison DT, Murray CJL. Global and regional burden of disease and risk factors, 2001: systematic analysis of population health data. Lancet. 2006;367:1747–1757. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)68770-9. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kahn-Marshall JL, Gallant MP. Making healthy behaviors the easy choice for employees: a review of the literature on environmental and policy changes in worksite health promotion. Health Educ Behav. 2012;39:752–776. doi: 10.1177/1090198111434153. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Schliemann D, Woodside JV. The effectiveness of dietary workplace interventions : a systematic review of systematic reviews. Public Health Nutr. 2019;22:942–955. doi: 10.1017/S1368980018003750. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Health and Safety Executive. Workplace health, safety and welfare. A short guide for managers. 2007. http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg244.pdf. Accessed 20 Jul 2018.
    1. Altman Y, Baruch Y. The organizational lunch. Cult Organ. 2010;16:127–142. doi: 10.1080/14759551003769284. - DOI

LinkOut - more resources