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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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
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