‘My kids have them 5 days a week…’ A survey of the frequency, types, parental experiences, and sociodemographic characteristics of squeeze pouch use in Tasmanian infants and children

Foods in squeeze pouches are widely available and are marketed as practical, convenient, and healthy food options for infants and children. However, these products do not provide adequate nutrition for growth (1) or align with the front-of-pack health claims. To develop effective strategies and guidance for squeeze pouch consumption, we need to understand which squeeze pouches are used, by whom, and why. A cross-sectional online survey of Tasmanian residents was conducted and included questions about the frequency and types of squeeze pouches consumed by infants and children (aged 0–18 years), the demographics of families who use squeeze pouches frequently and an open-ended question to explore parental motivations for using these products. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and logistic regression identified demographic predictors of frequent squeeze pouch use (weekly or more). Thematic analysis of qualitative survey responses explored parental experiences. Parents (n = 179; 78% female, 37% aged 35–45 years, 84% born in Australia; 73% university educated) reported on the squeeze pouch use of n = 248 children. Most infants (0–2 years; 71.4%) used squeeze pouches weekly (85.7% consumed in past year), favouring fruit-based (57%), dairy-based (57%), vegetable-based (50%), and meal-based (36%) pouches. Over half of children aged 2–5 years (62.5%) consumed pouches weekly (81.3% consumed in past year), preferring dairy-based (73%) and fruit-based (19%) pouches. Over a third of 6–12-year-olds (35.2%) consume pouches weekly (69.3% consumed in past year), including dairy-based (66%) and fruit-based pouches (20%). A smaller proportion (13.1%) of teenagers (13–17 years) consume pouches weekly (33.3% consumed in past year), primarily choosing dairy-based (26%) and fruit-based (6%) pouches. Younger parents were over 5 times more likely to be frequent users than parents aged over 46 years (18–34 years OR: 5.3, 95% CI 1.8–15.7; 35–45 years OR: 6.0, 95% CI 2.8–12.8). Speaking a language other than English (OR: 4.8; 95% CI 1.5–14.6) also significantly predicted frequent squeeze pouch use, while gender, education, employment status, income, and food security were not associated. Key themes from parents who identified as frequent squeeze pouch users centred around convenience, on-the-go feeding, and managing fussy eating or sensory needs. Parents discussed the societal paradox they experienced, with parents expressing a dislike for squeeze pouches yet using them for behaviour modification as a food reward or buying in bulk when discounted. An understanding of commercial food influences, and greater environmental consciousness were the most common themes described by parents who identified as non-users. This study highlights the widespread use of squeeze pouches among children, particularly in younger age groups but also into middle childhood and adolescence. Comprehensive national data is needed to inform public health strategies that minimise the use of squeeze pouches in children of all ages.