Dataset Information

Active Play in After-school Programmes: development of an intervention and description of a matched-pair cluster-randomised trial assessing physical activity play in after-school programmes.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:Interventions delivered in after-school programmes (ASPs) have the potential to become a means of ensuring adequate physical activity among schoolchildren. This requires a motivational climate, allowing for self-determined play. If trained, ASP staff may represent a valuable resource for supporting such play. Increasing knowledge and supportive skills among ASP staff may also potentially increase their motivation for work. The purpose of this article is to describe the development of the 'Active Play in ASP' intervention, which aims to promote physical activity among first graders attending ASP, and to present a protocol for a matched-pair cluster-randomised trial to evaluate the intervention. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:Informed by experiences from practice, evidence-based knowledge and theory, the intervention was developed in a stepwise process including focus group meetings and a small-scale pilot test. The intervention contains a course programme for ASP staff to increase their skills in how to support physical activity through play. In a cluster randomised controlled trial, the ASPs will be matched and randomly allocated to receive the 7-month intervention or to a control group. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline, after 7 and 19 months. First graders attending the ASPs included are eligible. The primary outcome will be accelerometer-determined minutes in moderate to vigorous physical activity in the ASP. The study uses a mixed methods approach including observations and interviews to provide rich descriptions of the concept of children's physical activity in ASP. Moreover, the trial will assess whether the ASP staff benefits from participation in the intervention in terms of increased work motivation. Lastly, process evaluations of programme fidelity, satisfaction and suggestions on improvement will be performed. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The study is approved by the Data Protection Official for Research (reference no 46008). Results will be presented in conferences and peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:Clinical Trials (NCT02954614), pre-results.

SUBMITTER: Riiser K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5629685 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Active Play in After-school Programmes: development of an intervention and description of a matched-pair cluster-randomised trial assessing physical activity play in after-school programmes.

Riiser Kirsti K Helseth Sølvi S Ellingsen Hanna H Fallang Bjørg B Løndal Knut K

BMJ open 20170804 8

<h4>Introduction</h4>Interventions delivered in after-school programmes (ASPs) have the potential to become a means of ensuring adequate physical activity among schoolchildren. This requires a motivational climate, allowing for self-determined play. If trained, ASP staff may represent a valuable resource for supporting such play. Increasing knowledge and supportive skills among ASP staff may also potentially increase their motivation for work. The purpose of this article is to describe the devel ...[more]

PMID: 28780558

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Interventions directed at after school programs (ASPs) have the potential to support physical activity (PA) in young children. Research has indicated that interventions that emphasize competence building among the ASP staff can lead to increased PA among the children. The present study evaluates the effectiveness of the Active Play in ASP intervention-a program for ASP staff aimed at supporting physical activity among first graders in ASP. METHODS:We used a matched-pair cluster randomized design and included 456 first graders from 14 schools in Norway. From these, 7 ASPs received the intervention (N = 229), while 7 acted as controls (N = 227). Measurements were taken at baseline, immediately post intervention (7 month follow-up) and after a year (19 month follow-up). The primary outcome was moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA), which was estimated with predefined cut points of counts per minute (CPM) and expressed as minutes/hour. Secondary outcomes were vigorous and light intensity physical activity (VPA and LPA) and sedentary behavior. The analyses of intervention effects were based on between-group differences in outcome changes between the 3 measurement points and were conducted using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures using categorical time. In exploratory analyses, we investigated gender, baseline body mass index, and baseline CPM as potential effect modifiers. RESULTS:No significant intervention effects was observed on MVPA (0.55 min/hour [99% CI -0.55:1.64]) or on the secondary outcomes, min/hour of LPA, VPA or sedentary behavior. Exploratory analyses indicated that among the 50% least physically active children at baseline, children in intervention ASPs reduced sedentary time from baseline to 19 months follow up by 1.67 min/hour (95% CI -3.12:-0.21) compared to the controls. CONCLUSIONS:Although the intervention did not significantly increase the mean MVPA among the children in the intervention ASPs compared to controls, it did seem to have a small effect by reducing sedentary behavior time among the least active children. An even stronger emphasis on how to identify less active children and support their activity may be needed in order to increase their PA and further reduce sedentary behavior time. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials; NCT02954614, Registered 3 November 2016, -Retrospectively registered, first participant enrolled August 2016.

Project description:BackgroundViolence against children from school staff is widespread in various settings, but few interventions address this. We tested whether the Good School Toolkit-a complex behavioural intervention designed by Ugandan not-for-profit organisation Raising Voices-could reduce physical violence from school staff to Ugandan primary school children.MethodsWe randomly selected 42 primary schools (clusters) from 151 schools in Luwero District, Uganda, with more than 40 primary 5 students and no existing governance interventions. All schools agreed to be enrolled. All students in primary 5, 6, and 7 (approximate ages 11-14 years) and all staff members who spoke either English or Luganda and could provide informed consent were eligible for participation in cross-sectional baseline and endline surveys in June-July 2012 and 2014, respectively. We randomly assigned 21 schools to receive the Good School Toolkit and 21 to a waitlisted control group in September, 2012. The intervention was implemented from September, 2012, to April, 2014. Owing to the nature of the intervention, it was not possible to mask assignment. The primary outcome, assessed in 2014, was past week physical violence from school staff, measured by students' self-reports using the International Society for the Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect Child Abuse Screening Tool-Child Institutional. Analyses were by intention to treat, and are adjusted for clustering within schools and for baseline school-level means of continuous outcomes. The trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01678846.FindingsNo schools left the study. At 18-month follow-up, 3820 (92·4%) of 4138 randomly sampled students participated in a cross-sectional survey. Prevalence of past week physical violence was lower in the intervention schools (595/1921, 31·0%) than in the control schools (924/1899, 48·7%; odds ratio 0·40, 95% CI 0·26-0·64, p<0·0001). No adverse events related to the intervention were detected, but 434 children were referred to child protective services because of what they disclosed in the follow-up survey.InterpretationThe Good School Toolkit is an effective intervention to reduce violence against children from school staff in Ugandan primary schools.FundingMRC, DfID, Wellcome Trust, Hewlett Foundation.

Project description:Patients at risk for generating high health care expenditures often receive fragmented, low-quality, inefficient health care. Guided Care is designed to provide proactive, coordinated, comprehensive care for such patients.We hypothesized that Guided Care, compared to usual care, produces better functional health and quality of care, while reducing the use of expensive health services.32-month, single-blind, matched-pair, cluster-randomized controlled trial of Guided Care, conducted in eight community-based primary care practices.The "Hierarchical Condition Category" (HCC) predictive model was used to identify high-risk older patients who were insured by fee-for-service Medicare, a Medicare Advantage plan or Tricare. Patients with HCC scores in the highest quartile (at risk for generating high health care expenditures during the coming year) were eligible to participate.A registered nurse collaborated with two to five primary care physicians in providing eight services to participants: comprehensive assessment, evidence-based care planning, proactive monitoring, care coordination, transitional care, coaching for self-management, caregiver support, and access to community-based services.Functional health was measured using the Short Form-36. Quality of care and health services utilization were measured using the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care and health insurance claims, respectively.Of the eligible patients, 904 (37.8 %) gave written consent to participate; of these, 477 (52.8 %) completed the final interview, and 848 (93.8 %) provided complete claims data. In intention-to-treat analyses, Guided Care did not significantly improve participants' functional health, but it was associated with significantly higher participant ratings of the quality of care (difference?=?0.27, 95 % CI?=?0.08-0.45) and 29 % lower use of home care (95 % CI?=?3-48 %).Guided Care improves high-risk older patients' ratings of the quality of their care, and it reduces their use of home care, but it does not appear to improve their functional health.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Increasing the frequency of periods of outdoor free-play in childcare may represent an opportunity to increase child physical activity. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of scheduling multiple periods of outdoor free-play in increasing the time children spend in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) while attending childcare. METHODS:The study employed a cluster randomised controlled trial design involving children aged 3 to 6 years, attending ten childcare services in the Hunter New England region of New South Wales, Australia. Five services were randomised to receive the intervention and five to a control condition. The intervention involved services scheduling three separate periods of outdoor free-play from 9 am to 3 pm per day, each at least 15 min in duration, with the total equivalent to their usual daily duration of outdoor play period. Control services implemented the usual single continuous period of outdoor free-play over this time. The primary outcome, children's moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) while in care per day, was measured over 5 days via accelerometers at baseline and at 3 months post baseline. Secondary outcomes included percentage of time spent in MVPA while in care per day, total physical activity while in care per day and documented child injury, a hypothesised potential unintended adverse event. Childcare services and data collectors were not blind to the experimental group allocation. RESULTS:Parents of 439 (71.6%) children attending participating childcare services consented for their child to participate in the trial. Of these, 316 (72.0%) children provided valid accelerometer data at both time points. Relative to children in control services, mean daily minutes of MVPA in care was significantly greater at follow-up among children attending intervention services (adjusted difference between groups 5.21 min, 95% CI 0.59-9.83 p?=?0.03). Percentage of time spent in MVPA in care per day was also greater at follow-up among children in intervention services relative to control services (adjusted difference between groups 1.57, 95% CI 0.64-2.49 p?<?0.001). Total physical activity while in care per day, assessed via counts per minute approached but did not reach significance (adjusted difference between groups 14.25, 95% CI 2.26-30.76 p?=?0.09). There were no differences between groups in child injury nor subgroup interactions for the primary trial outcome by child age, sex, or baseline MVPA levels. CONCLUSION:Scheduling multiple periods of outdoor free-play significantly increased the time children spent in MVPA while in attendance at childcare. This simple ecological intervention could be considered for broader dissemination as a strategy to increase child physical activity at a population level. TRIAL REGISTRATION:This trial was prospectively registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ( ACTRN1261000347460 ). Prospectively registered 17th March 2016.

Dataset Information

Active Play in After-school Programmes: development of an intervention and description of a matched-pair cluster-randomised trial assessing physical activity play in after-school programmes.

Publications

Active Play in After-school Programmes: development of an intervention and description of a matched-pair cluster-randomised trial assessing physical activity play in after-school programmes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets