Dataset Information

Activity in nature mediates a park prescription intervention's effects on physical activity, park use and quality of life: a mixed-methods process evaluation.

ABSTRACT:

Background

This process evaluation explored the implementation and mechanisms of impact of a Park Prescription Intervention trial (PPI), including the effects of hypothesised mediators (motivation, social support, recreational physical activity [PA], park use and park PA) on trial outcomes.

Methods

Participants from the community were randomly allocated to intervention (n?=?80) or control (n?=?80) group. The intervention included baseline counselling, a prescription of exercise in parks, materials, three-month follow-up counselling and 26 weekly group exercise sessions in parks. Process evaluation indicators were assessed at three- and six-months. Implementation indicators included participation rates in intervention components and survey questions plus focus group discussions (FGDs) to understand which components participants valued. FGDs further assessed barriers and facilitators to intervention participation. To explore mechanisms of impact, linear regression was used to compare objectively measured PA between quantiles of group exercise participation. Structural equation modelling (SEM) explored hypothesised mediation of the significant intervention effects. Framework analysis was conducted for FGDs.

Results

Participants were middle-aged (mean 51, SD?±?6.3?years), predominantly female (79%) and of Chinese ethnicity (81%). All intervention participants received baseline counselling, the park prescription and materials, whilst 94% received the follow-up counselling. Mean minutes of moderate-to-vigorous PA/week (95% CI) differed by group exercise participation (p?=?0.018): 0% participation (n?=?18) 128.3 (69.3, 187.2) minutes, >?0-35.9% participation (n?=?18) 100.3 (36.9, 163.6) minutes, >?35.9-67.9% participation (n?=?17) 50.5 (-?4.9, 105.9) minutes and?>?67.9% participation (n?=?18) 177.4 (122.0, 232.8) minutes. Park PA at three-months had significant mediating effects (95% CI) on recreational PA 26.50 (6.65, 49.37) minutes/week, park use 185.38 (45.40, 353.74) minutes/month, park PA/month 165.48 (33.14, 334.16) minutes and psychological quality of life score 1.25 (0.19, 2.69) at six-months. Prioritising time with family and preferences for unstructured activities were barriers to intervention participation. Human interaction via follow-up or group exercise were facilitators.

Conclusion

This process evaluation showed park PA consistently mediated effects of the PPI, suggesting activity in parks was a mechanism of its effects. To optimise effectiveness, participants' preference for prioritising time with family through family involvement and tailoring the intervention to participants' preferences for structured or unstructured PA could be considered in future studies.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02615392 , 26 November 2015.

SUBMITTER: Petrunoff N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7825241 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Activity in nature mediates a park prescription intervention's effects on physical activity, park use and quality of life: a mixed-methods process evaluation.

Petrunoff Nicholas N Yao Jiali J Sia Angelia A Ng Alwyn A Ramiah Anbumalar A Wong Michael M Han Jane J Tai Bee Choo BC Uijtdewilligen Léonie L Müller-Riemenschneider Falk F

BMC public health 20210122 1

<h4>Background</h4>This process evaluation explored the implementation and mechanisms of impact of a Park Prescription Intervention trial (PPI), including the effects of hypothesised mediators (motivation, social support, recreational physical activity [PA], park use and park PA) on trial outcomes.<h4>Methods</h4>Participants from the community were randomly allocated to intervention (n = 80) or control (n = 80) group. The intervention included baseline counselling, a prescription of exercise in ...[more]

PMID: 33482787

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRegular physical activity (PA) is crucial for well-being; however, healthy habits are difficult to create and maintain. Interventions delivered via conversational agents (eg, chatbots or virtual agents) are a novel and potentially accessible way to promote PA. Thus, it is important to understand the evolving landscape of research that uses conversational agents.ObjectiveThis mixed methods systematic review aims to summarize the usability and effectiveness of conversational agents in promoting PA, describe common theories and intervention components used, and identify areas for further development.MethodsWe conducted a mixed methods systematic review. We searched seven electronic databases (PsycINFO, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, ACM Digital Library, Scopus, and Web of Science) for quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods studies that conveyed primary research on automated conversational agents designed to increase PA. The studies were independently screened, and their methodological quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool by 2 reviewers. Data on intervention impact and effectiveness, treatment characteristics, and challenges were extracted and analyzed using parallel-results convergent synthesis and narrative summary.ResultsIn total, 255 studies were identified, 7.8% (20) of which met our inclusion criteria. The methodological quality of the studies was varied. Overall, conversational agents had moderate usability and feasibility. Those that were evaluated through randomized controlled trials were found to be effective in promoting PA. Common challenges facing interventions were repetitive program content, high attrition, technical issues, and safety and privacy concerns.ConclusionsConversational agents hold promise for PA interventions. However, there is a lack of rigorous research on long-term intervention effectiveness and patient safety. Future interventions should be based on evidence-informed theories and treatment approaches and should address users' desires for program variety, natural language processing, delivery via mobile devices, and safety and privacy concerns.

Project description:BackgroundCo-creation strategies, such as cooperative planning, are promising as a means to ensure that physical activity interventions address real-world problems and are tailored to the target group. This has already been validated in diverse settings. However, questions targeting the transferability of cooperative planning to new settings and the key factors influencing its success or failure remain unclear. At the same time, co-creation processes are complex, and evaluation can be challenging. Following calls for detailed reporting, this paper describes the programme activities, the underlying logic, and methodological design of a study that aims to evaluate the transfer of cooperative planning to new settings and to explore the associated key determinants.MethodsCooperative planning was utilized as a strategy to target physical activity promotion in three real-world German settings in the nursing care and automotive mechatronics sectors. This involved researchers working alongside stakeholders from practice and policy to conjointly develop new interventions to promote physical activity in physically demanding jobs. A pragmatic approach is used to evaluate both the transferability and key determinants of this strategy. We developed a logic model for this co-creation process that describes the underlying assumptions and guides the evaluation. The evaluation outcomes of this study include planning meetings, newly developed interventions, and the determinants that are likely to affect cooperative planning. Quantitative and qualitative data will be collected using questionnaires, documents, and interviews. The quantitative data will be analysed descriptively, while the qualitative data will mainly be analysed using qualitative content analysis, split by settings. Subsequently, data triangulation will be used to integrate the quantitative and qualitative findings, which will then be compared across all three settings.DiscussionThe study findings will contribute to a better understanding of co-creation strategies, their transferability, and key determinants. The practical implications can include a checklist for assessing key determinants and a guideline for transferring cooperative planning into new settings to benefit more people. Ultimately, this study will help to advance co-creation strategies and may be relevant for researchers, practitioners, and policy-makers targeting physical activity promotion in various contexts.Trial registrationOpen Science Framework: https://osf.io/r6xnt/ (retrospectively registered).

Project description:BACKGROUND:Programs promoting population health through physical activity (PA) and exposure to nature are popular, but few have been evaluated in randomized-controlled trials (RCTs). OBJECTIVE:To investigate the effectiveness of a park prescription intervention (PPI) for improving total moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA), other PA related behaviors, quality of life (QoL) and cardio-metabolic health among adults. METHODS:Healthy individuals aged 40 to 65?years were recruited through community health screenings and randomly assigned to 1) PPI: face-to-face Park Prescription + invitation to weekly exercise sessions in parks, or 2) control: standard PA materials. After the six-month intervention, participants completed accelerometer assessments, questionnaires on health behaviors and QoL, and health screenings. Independent sample t-tests were used to compare outcomes between groups, with secondary analysis adjusted for co-variates via multiple linear regression. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS:Eighty participants were allocated to each group. Participants with mean age of 51.1 (Standard Deviation: 6.3) years were predominantly female (79%) and of Chinese ethnicity (81%). Participation in the group exercise started at 48% and declined to 24% by week 26. At six-months, 145 (91%) participants attended health screenings for outcome measure collection, and 126 (79%) provided valid accelerometer data. Time spent in MVPA favored the PPI group but this difference was not statistically significant (4.4 (-?43.8, 52.7) minutes/week; when removing 2 extreme outliers 26.8 (-?9.7, 63.4) minutes/week). Time spent in parks (147.5 (2.1, 292.9) minutes/month), PA in parks (192.5 (59.5, 325.5) minutes/month), and recreational PA (48.7 (1.4, 96.0) minutes/week) were significantly greater in the PPI group. PPI also significantly improved psychological QoL (4.0 (0.0, 8.0). DISCUSSION:PPI improved park use, PA in parks, recreational PA, and psychological QoL but not total MVPA. Future RCTs' are warranted to investigate PPI in different target populations and to provide further evidence for improvements in health outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02615392, 26 November 2015.

Project description:BackgroundModifying the built environment by improving parks is potentially a sustainable way to increase population level physical activity. Despite considerable investment in parks and park renovations, few natural experiments on the impact of improving amenities on park use and park-based physical activity have been conducted. REVAMP is a natural experiment that aims to examine whether park improvement increases overall park usage, park-based physical activity and active travel to and from the park in the intervention compared with the control park over a two-year period; and to identify which specific aspects of the park refurbishment attracts park visitors and encourages park users to be more active. This paper describes the methods of the REVAMP study.MethodsThe intervention park is a large regional park (329 hectares) located in a low socio-economic status (SES) area in the north-eastern suburbs of Melbourne, Australia. The control park is a regional park (120 hectares) located in a high SES area in the eastern suburbs of Melbourne. Multiple methodologies to evaluate the impact of the park renovation are being employed including: cross-sectional surveys of local residents living near the two parks, direct observations of park users, intercept surveys with park users, and electronic monitoring of path usage and car traffic within the parks. Baseline measures were conducted in April-May 2013 (T1), and an innovative play space suitable for children of all ages and abilities was installed at the intervention park between September 2013 and February 2014. Follow-up measures will be repeated in April-May 2014 (T2) and April-May 2015 (T3). All methodologies will be completed at both the intervention and control parks at all three time-points, with the exception of the cross-sectional survey of local residents which will only be conducted at T1 and T3.ConclusionThis research will inform future park developments, and will contribute to creating an evidence base of the impact of park refurbishment, and the development of natural experiment methodology.Trial registrationCurrent controlled trial ISRCTN50745547, registration date 11.1.2014.

Dataset Information

Activity in nature mediates a park prescription intervention's effects on physical activity, park use and quality of life: a mixed-methods process evaluation.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Trial registration

Publications

Activity in nature mediates a park prescription intervention's effects on physical activity, park use and quality of life: a mixed-methods process evaluation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets