Impact of the Healthy Foods North nutrition intervention program on Inuit and Inuvialuit food consumption and preparation methods in Canadian Arctic communities

Table 5 Change in the most frequently reported preparation methods pre- and post- intervention by intervention assignment among adult Inuit and Inuvialuit

Preparation methods	Intervention				Control				Δ intervention vs. Δ control¹
	Pre (n = 246)		Post (n = 246)		Pre (n = 132)		Post (n = 132)
	Mean	SD	Mean	SD	Mean	SD	Mean	SD
Unhealthy methods²	2.0 ^†	1.0	1.6 ^†	0.9	1.9	1.1	1.8	1.0	−0.2
Healthy methods³	3.9‡	1.3	4.3‡	1.3	4.5	1.5	4.3	1.4	0.5‡
*Select preparation methods*
Microwaved, baked, roasted, broiled (no added fat) ²	2.0*	1.6	2.2*	1.4	2.3	1.6	2.0	1.3	0.5*
Microwaved, baked, roasted, broiled (added fat) ²	0.7*	1.4	0.4*	0.7	0.1 ^†	0.4	0.4 ^†	0.7	−0.7 ^†
Deep fried in oil, lard, animal fat, or shortening²	0.3 ^†	0.7	0.1 ^†	0.3	0.9 ^†	1.4	0.2 ^†	0.4	0.5 ^†
Pan fried in oil, lard, animal fat, or shortening²	2.6‡	1.7	2.1‡	0.3	2.6*	1.8	2.2*	1.4	−0.1*
Pan fried in own fat or water and drained; rinsed⁴	0.1*	0.3	0.2*	0.5	0.2	0.6	0.2	0.5	0.2*
Raw (or frozen raw), dried⁴	0.7*	0.9	0.8*	0.9	0.8	1.0	0.7	0.8	0.2

¹Change in number of times method reported by individuals = (post – pre-intervention) - (post – pre-control).
²Wilcoxon Signed Rank Sum Test to test the intra-group difference between pre- and post- intervention.
³Paired t-test to test the intra-group difference between pre- and post- intervention.
⁴Two-sample t-test with equal variances.
*p ≤ 0.05; ‡ p ≤ 0.001; ^†p ≤ 0.0001.

ISSN: 1475-2891