Abstract
In 2016, New York City (NYC) began enforcing a sodium warning regulation at chain restaurants, requiring placement of an icon next to any menu item containing ≥2,300 mg sodium. As shifts in consumer purchases are a potential outcome of menu labeling, we investigated whether high-sodium purchases from NYC chains changed following policy implementation. Consumer purchases, using receipts for verification, were assessed at 2 full-service (FSR) and 2 quick-service (QSR) chain restaurants in NYC and Yonkers, NY, which did not have sodium menu labeling, in 2015 (baseline) and 2017 (follow-up). Difference-in-difference regression models, adjusted for demographic and location co-variates, tested whether the proportion of NYC respondents purchasing high-sodium item(s) (containing ≥2,300 mg sodium) or whether mean sodium content of purchases changed, in FSR or QSR. Relative to Yonkers, the proportion of NYC respondents purchasing 1 or more high-sodium items did not significantly differ from baseline to follow-up at FSR (difference-in-difference: -4.6%, p=0.364) or QSR (difference-in-difference: -8.9%, p=0.196). Among NYC FSR respondents, mean sodium purchased significantly declined compared to Yonkers (difference-in-difference: -524 mg, p=0.012); no changes in mean sodium were observed among QSR participants (difference-in-difference: 258 mg, p=0.185). While the reduction in mean sodium purchased among NYC FSR patrons after the sodium warning implementation is encouraging, there was not a corresponding reduction in the proportion of respondents purchasing high-sodium items. Further research that evaluates longer-term changes in the restaurant environment, including menu offerings and consumer purchases, following such policies is warranted.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The authors received no specific funding for this work.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The DOHMH's IRB reviewed the study protocol and determined it to be exempt human subjects' research.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Datafiles and code will be made available on GitHub following manuscript acceptance.
