586 - Predictive Factors for Nonparticipation in the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) by Caregivers of Eligible Children

Poster Number: 586
Publication Number: 586.241

Yuliya Faryna, University of Connecticut, Hartford, CT, United States; Justin Slifer, University of Connecticut, Cromwell, CT, United States; Alex Clonan, University of Connecticut, Avon, CT, United States; Julie Dong, University of Connecticut, Farmington, CT, United States; Sharon Smith, Connecticut Children's Medical Center/UConn, Canton, CT, United States

Background:  
Children’s WIC coverage rates nationally and in Connecticut (CT) have gradually decreased over the decades and substantially trail behind Infants’ and Pregnant/Postpartum Women’s coverage rates. The COVID-19 pandemic compounded this issue; SNAP and Medicaid enrollments increased while WIC enrollments continued to lag. Under these conditions, childhood food insecurity and nutrition-related health disparities persist. More information is needed to identify predictors of and reasons for caregiver nonparticipation in WIC to inform potential family-centered interventions to decrease attrition.

Objective:  
To identify risk factors and reasons for WIC nonparticipation by caregivers of eligible children.

Design/Methods: This is a single-center cross-sectional survey study. Inclusion criteria were caregivers of WIC-eligible children who are recipients of Medicaid and present to an urban pediatric emergency department in Hartford, CT. Questions focused on caregivers’ sociodemographic characteristics and attitudes, knowledge and experiences related to the WIC program. Data were analyzed using exploratory methods and logistic regression, p-values < 0.05 considered significant.

Results:  
288 caregivers met inclusion criteria. Many sociodemographic factors were similar between participants and nonparticipants (Table 1). However, an association existed between nonparticipation (NP) and gender, number of adults in a household and presence of healthcare provider-dispensed education on health benefits of WIC (Table 2). The risk of NP for male compared to female caregivers was 1.6, 95% CI (1.1, 2.0), p=0.02. For caregivers in two-adult households compared to one-adult households the risk of NP was 1.5, 95% CI (1.1, 2.0), p=0.02. The risk of NP for caregivers lacking compared to possessing healthcare provider-sourced education on health benefits of WIC was 1.7, 95% CI (1.3, 2.0), p< < 0.01. Nonparticipating caregivers reported not needing WIC services, not knowing how to apply and being ineligible. Caregivers also disclosed barriers related to WIC appointment/clinic availability and accessibility (Table 3).Conclusion(s):  
Risk factors for nonparticipation include identifying as male, living in a two-adult household and lacking healthcare provider-sourced education on health benefits of WIC. This suggests that clinical interventions during primary care visits, with attention to two-adult households and males with WIC-eligible children, may be a key step to decreasing WIC attrition. Further qualitative research is needed to fully grasp nonparticipating caregivers’ attitudes towards WIC.
Table 1: Sociodemographics CharacteristicsTotal Number of Participants n=288
SDC= Sociodemographic Characteristics
P= Participating Caregivers
NP= Nonparticipating Caregivers
Male Gender* and Two Adults in Household* were significant predictors of nonparticipation
Table 2: Logistic Regression Model of Significant Predictors of Caregiver WIC NonparticipationP < 0.05 considered significant
In the regression analyses, WIC Nonparticipation is indicated by no= 0 and yes= 1