Email updates

Keep up to date with the latest news and content from BMC Public Health and BioMed Central.

Open Access Research article

Availability of healthier options in traditional and nontraditional rural fast-food outlets

Jennifer S Creel1, Joseph R Sharkey12*, Alex McIntosh3, Jenna Anding4 and J Charles Huber5

Author Affiliations

1 Texas Healthy Aging Research Network, School of Rural Public Health, Texas A&M Health Science Center, MS 1266, College Station, TX, USA

2 Department of Social and Behavioral Health, School of Rural Public Health, Texas A&M Health Science Center, College Station, TX, USA

3 Department of Sociology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA

4 Department of Nutrition and Food Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA

5 Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Rural Public Health, Texas A&M Health Science Center, College Station, TX, USA

For all author emails, please log on.

BMC Public Health 2008, 8:395  doi:10.1186/1471-2458-8-395

Published: 28 November 2008

Abstract

Background

Food prepared away from home has become increasingly popular to U.S. families, and may contribute to obesity. Sales have been dominated by fast food outlets, where meals are purchased for dining away from home or in the home. Although national chain affiliated fast-food outlets are considered the main source for fast food, fast foods are increasingly available in convenience stores and supermarkets/grocery stores. In rural areas, these nontraditional fast-food outlets may provide most of the opportunities for procurement of fast foods.

Methods

Using all traditional and nontraditio nal fast-food outlets identified in six counties in rural Texas, the type and number of regular and healthiermenu options were surveyed using on-site observation in all food venues that were primarily fast food, supermarket/grocery store, and convenience store and compared with 2005 Dietary Guidelines.

Results

Traditional fast-food outlets represented 84 (41%) of the 205 opportunities for procurement of fast food; 109 (53.2%) were convenience stores and 12 (5.8%) supermarkets/grocery stores. Although a s imilar variety of regular breakfast and lunch/dinner entrées were available in traditional fast-food outlets and convenience stores, the variety of healthier breakfast and lunch/dinner entrées was significantly greater in fast food outlets. Compared with convenience stores, supermarkets/grocery stores provided a greater variety of regular and healthier entrées and lunch/dinner side dishes.

Conclusion

Convenience stores and supermarkets/grocery stores more than double the potential access to fast foods in this rural area than traditional fast-food outlets alone; however, traditional fast food outlets offer greater opportunity for healthier fast food options than convenience stores. A complete picture of fast food environment and the availability of healthier fast food options are essential to understand environmental influences on diet and health outcomes, and identify potential targets for intervention.