Cargando…
What works best when implementing a physical activity intervention for teenagers? Reflections from the ACTIVE Project: a qualitative study
OBJECTIVE: This paper explores what aspects of a multicomponent intervention were deemed strengths and weaknesses by teenagers and the local council when promoting physical activity to young people. DESIGN: Qualitative findings at 12 months from a mixed method randomised control trial. METHODS: Acti...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6530318/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31079080 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025618 |
_version_ | 1783420614173786112 |
---|---|
author | James, Michaela Christian, Danielle Scott, Samantha Todd, Charlotte Stratton, Gareth Demmler, Joanne McCoubrey, Sarah Halcox, Julian Audrey, Suzanne Ellins, Elizabeth A Irvine, Elizabeth Brophy, Sinead |
author_facet | James, Michaela Christian, Danielle Scott, Samantha Todd, Charlotte Stratton, Gareth Demmler, Joanne McCoubrey, Sarah Halcox, Julian Audrey, Suzanne Ellins, Elizabeth A Irvine, Elizabeth Brophy, Sinead |
author_sort | James, Michaela |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: This paper explores what aspects of a multicomponent intervention were deemed strengths and weaknesses by teenagers and the local council when promoting physical activity to young people. DESIGN: Qualitative findings at 12 months from a mixed method randomised control trial. METHODS: Active Children Through Incentive Vouchers—Evaluation (ACTIVE) gave teenagers £20 of activity enabling vouchers every month for a year. Peer mentors were also trained and a support worker worked with teenagers to improve knowledge of what was available. Semistructured focus groups took place at 12 months to assess strengths and weaknesses of the intervention. Eight focus groups (n=64 participants) took place with teenagers and one additional focus group was dedicated to the local council’s sport development team (n=8 participants). Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. RESULTS: Teenagers used the vouchers on three main activities: trampolining, laser tag or the water park. These appeal to both genders, are social, fun and require no prior skill or training. Choice and financial support for teenagers in deprived areas was considered a strength by teenagers and the local council. Teenagers did not engage with a trained peer mentor but the support worker was considered helpful. CONCLUSIONS: The ACTIVE Project’s delivery had both strengths and weakness that could be used to underpin future physical activity promotion. Future interventions should focus on improving access to low cost, fun, unstructured and social activities rather than structured organised exercise/sport. The lessons learnt from this project can help bridge the gap between what is promoted to teenagers and what they actually want from activity provision. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN75594310 |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6530318 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-65303182019-06-07 What works best when implementing a physical activity intervention for teenagers? Reflections from the ACTIVE Project: a qualitative study James, Michaela Christian, Danielle Scott, Samantha Todd, Charlotte Stratton, Gareth Demmler, Joanne McCoubrey, Sarah Halcox, Julian Audrey, Suzanne Ellins, Elizabeth A Irvine, Elizabeth Brophy, Sinead BMJ Open Public Health OBJECTIVE: This paper explores what aspects of a multicomponent intervention were deemed strengths and weaknesses by teenagers and the local council when promoting physical activity to young people. DESIGN: Qualitative findings at 12 months from a mixed method randomised control trial. METHODS: Active Children Through Incentive Vouchers—Evaluation (ACTIVE) gave teenagers £20 of activity enabling vouchers every month for a year. Peer mentors were also trained and a support worker worked with teenagers to improve knowledge of what was available. Semistructured focus groups took place at 12 months to assess strengths and weaknesses of the intervention. Eight focus groups (n=64 participants) took place with teenagers and one additional focus group was dedicated to the local council’s sport development team (n=8 participants). Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. RESULTS: Teenagers used the vouchers on three main activities: trampolining, laser tag or the water park. These appeal to both genders, are social, fun and require no prior skill or training. Choice and financial support for teenagers in deprived areas was considered a strength by teenagers and the local council. Teenagers did not engage with a trained peer mentor but the support worker was considered helpful. CONCLUSIONS: The ACTIVE Project’s delivery had both strengths and weakness that could be used to underpin future physical activity promotion. Future interventions should focus on improving access to low cost, fun, unstructured and social activities rather than structured organised exercise/sport. The lessons learnt from this project can help bridge the gap between what is promoted to teenagers and what they actually want from activity provision. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN75594310 BMJ Publishing Group 2019-05-10 /pmc/articles/PMC6530318/ /pubmed/31079080 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025618 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Public Health James, Michaela Christian, Danielle Scott, Samantha Todd, Charlotte Stratton, Gareth Demmler, Joanne McCoubrey, Sarah Halcox, Julian Audrey, Suzanne Ellins, Elizabeth A Irvine, Elizabeth Brophy, Sinead What works best when implementing a physical activity intervention for teenagers? Reflections from the ACTIVE Project: a qualitative study |
title | What works best when implementing a physical activity intervention for teenagers? Reflections from the ACTIVE Project: a qualitative study |
title_full | What works best when implementing a physical activity intervention for teenagers? Reflections from the ACTIVE Project: a qualitative study |
title_fullStr | What works best when implementing a physical activity intervention for teenagers? Reflections from the ACTIVE Project: a qualitative study |
title_full_unstemmed | What works best when implementing a physical activity intervention for teenagers? Reflections from the ACTIVE Project: a qualitative study |
title_short | What works best when implementing a physical activity intervention for teenagers? Reflections from the ACTIVE Project: a qualitative study |
title_sort | what works best when implementing a physical activity intervention for teenagers? reflections from the active project: a qualitative study |
topic | Public Health |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6530318/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31079080 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025618 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT jamesmichaela whatworksbestwhenimplementingaphysicalactivityinterventionforteenagersreflectionsfromtheactiveprojectaqualitativestudy AT christiandanielle whatworksbestwhenimplementingaphysicalactivityinterventionforteenagersreflectionsfromtheactiveprojectaqualitativestudy AT scottsamantha whatworksbestwhenimplementingaphysicalactivityinterventionforteenagersreflectionsfromtheactiveprojectaqualitativestudy AT toddcharlotte whatworksbestwhenimplementingaphysicalactivityinterventionforteenagersreflectionsfromtheactiveprojectaqualitativestudy AT strattongareth whatworksbestwhenimplementingaphysicalactivityinterventionforteenagersreflectionsfromtheactiveprojectaqualitativestudy AT demmlerjoanne whatworksbestwhenimplementingaphysicalactivityinterventionforteenagersreflectionsfromtheactiveprojectaqualitativestudy AT mccoubreysarah whatworksbestwhenimplementingaphysicalactivityinterventionforteenagersreflectionsfromtheactiveprojectaqualitativestudy AT halcoxjulian whatworksbestwhenimplementingaphysicalactivityinterventionforteenagersreflectionsfromtheactiveprojectaqualitativestudy AT audreysuzanne whatworksbestwhenimplementingaphysicalactivityinterventionforteenagersreflectionsfromtheactiveprojectaqualitativestudy AT ellinselizabetha whatworksbestwhenimplementingaphysicalactivityinterventionforteenagersreflectionsfromtheactiveprojectaqualitativestudy AT irvineelizabeth whatworksbestwhenimplementingaphysicalactivityinterventionforteenagersreflectionsfromtheactiveprojectaqualitativestudy AT brophysinead whatworksbestwhenimplementingaphysicalactivityinterventionforteenagersreflectionsfromtheactiveprojectaqualitativestudy |