Strategies for enhancing the implementation of school-based policies or practices targeting diet, physical activity, obesity, tobacco or alcohol use.

IF 8.8 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Daniel Cw Lee, Kate M O'Brien, Sam McCrabb, Luke Wolfenden, Flora Tzelepis, Courtney Barnes, Serene Yoong, Kate M Bartlem, Rebecca K Hodder
{"title":"Strategies for enhancing the implementation of school-based policies or practices targeting diet, physical activity, obesity, tobacco or alcohol use.","authors":"Daniel Cw Lee, Kate M O'Brien, Sam McCrabb, Luke Wolfenden, Flora Tzelepis, Courtney Barnes, Serene Yoong, Kate M Bartlem, Rebecca K Hodder","doi":"10.1002/14651858.CD011677.pub4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>A range of school-based interventions are effective in improving student diet and physical activity (e.g. school food policy interventions and classroom physical activity interventions), and reducing obesity, tobacco use and/or alcohol use (e.g. tobacco control programmes and alcohol education programmes). However, schools are frequently unsuccessful in implementing such evidence-based interventions.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The primary review objective is to evaluate the effectiveness of strategies aiming to improve school implementation of interventions to address students' (aged 5 to 18 years) diet, physical activity, obesity, tobacco use and/or alcohol use. The secondary objectives are to: 1. determine whether the effects are different based on the characteristics of the intervention including school type and the health behaviour or risk factor targeted by the intervention; 2. describe any unintended consequences and adverse effects of strategies on schools, school staff or students; and 3. describe the cost or cost-effectiveness of strategies.</p><p><strong>Search methods: </strong>We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), five additional databases, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), and the US National Institutes of Health registry (clinicaltrials.gov). The latest search was between 1 May 2021 and 30 June 2023 to identify any relevant trials published since the last published review.</p><p><strong>Selection criteria: </strong>We defined 'implementation' as the use of strategies to adopt and integrate evidence-based health interventions and to change practice patterns within specific settings. We included any randomised controlled trial (RCT) or cluster-RCT conducted on any scale, in a school setting, with a parallel control group that compared a strategy to improve the implementation of policies or practices to address diet, physical activity, obesity, tobacco use and/or alcohol use by students (aged 5 to 18 years) to no active implementation strategy (i.e. no intervention, inclusive of usual practice, minimal support) or a different implementation strategy.</p><p><strong>Data collection and analysis: </strong>We used standard Cochrane methods. Given the large number of outcomes reported, we selected and included the effects of a single outcome measure for each trial for the primary outcome using a decision hierarchy (i.e. continuous over dichotomous, most valid, total score over subscore). Where possible, we calculated standardised mean differences (SMDs) to account for variable outcome measures with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We conducted meta-analyses using a random-effects model. Where we could not combine data in meta-analysis, we followed recommended Cochrane methods and reported results in accordance with 'Synthesis without meta-analysis' (SWiM) guidelines. We conducted assessments of risk of bias and evaluated the certainty of evidence (GRADE approach) using Cochrane procedures.</p><p><strong>Main results: </strong>We included an additional 14 trials in this update, bringing the total number of included trials in the review to 39 trials with 83 trial arms and 6489 participants. Of these, the majority were conducted in Australia and the USA (n = 15 each). Nine were RCTs and 30 were cluster-RCTs. Twelve trials tested strategies to implement healthy eating practices; 17 physical activity, two tobacco, one alcohol, and seven a combination of risk factors. All trials used multiple implementation strategies, the most common being educational materials, educational meetings, and education outreach visits, or academic detailing. Of the 39 included trials, we judged 26 as having high risks of bias, 11 as having some concerns, and two as having low risk of bias across all domains. Pooled analyses found, relative to a control (no active implementation strategy), the use of implementation strategies probably results in a large increase in the implementation of interventions in schools (SMD 0.95, 95% CI 0.71, 1.19; I<sup>2</sup> = 78%; 30 trials, 4912 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). This is equivalent to a 0.76 increase in the implementation of seven physical activity intervention components when the SMD is re-expressed using an implementation measure from a selected included trial. Subgroup analyses by school type and targeted health behaviour or risk factor did not identify any differential effects, and only one study was included that was implemented at scale. Compared to a control (no active implementation strategy), no unintended consequences or adverse effects of interventions were identified in the 11 trials that reported assessing them (1595 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Nine trials compared costs between groups with and without an implementation strategy and the results of these comparisons were mixed (2136 participants; low-certainty evidence). A lack of consistent terminology describing implementation strategies was an important limitation of the review.</p><p><strong>Authors' conclusions: </strong>We found the use of implementation strategies probably results in large increases in implementation of interventions targeting healthy eating, physical activity, tobacco and/or alcohol use. While the effectiveness of individual implementation strategies could not be determined, such examination will likely be possible in future updates as data from new trials can be synthesised. Such research will further guide efforts to facilitate the translation of evidence into practice in this setting. The review will be maintained as a living systematic review.</p>","PeriodicalId":10473,"journal":{"name":"Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews","volume":"12 ","pages":"CD011677"},"PeriodicalIF":8.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11635919/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011677.pub4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: A range of school-based interventions are effective in improving student diet and physical activity (e.g. school food policy interventions and classroom physical activity interventions), and reducing obesity, tobacco use and/or alcohol use (e.g. tobacco control programmes and alcohol education programmes). However, schools are frequently unsuccessful in implementing such evidence-based interventions.

Objectives: The primary review objective is to evaluate the effectiveness of strategies aiming to improve school implementation of interventions to address students' (aged 5 to 18 years) diet, physical activity, obesity, tobacco use and/or alcohol use. The secondary objectives are to: 1. determine whether the effects are different based on the characteristics of the intervention including school type and the health behaviour or risk factor targeted by the intervention; 2. describe any unintended consequences and adverse effects of strategies on schools, school staff or students; and 3. describe the cost or cost-effectiveness of strategies.

Search methods: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), five additional databases, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), and the US National Institutes of Health registry (clinicaltrials.gov). The latest search was between 1 May 2021 and 30 June 2023 to identify any relevant trials published since the last published review.

Selection criteria: We defined 'implementation' as the use of strategies to adopt and integrate evidence-based health interventions and to change practice patterns within specific settings. We included any randomised controlled trial (RCT) or cluster-RCT conducted on any scale, in a school setting, with a parallel control group that compared a strategy to improve the implementation of policies or practices to address diet, physical activity, obesity, tobacco use and/or alcohol use by students (aged 5 to 18 years) to no active implementation strategy (i.e. no intervention, inclusive of usual practice, minimal support) or a different implementation strategy.

Data collection and analysis: We used standard Cochrane methods. Given the large number of outcomes reported, we selected and included the effects of a single outcome measure for each trial for the primary outcome using a decision hierarchy (i.e. continuous over dichotomous, most valid, total score over subscore). Where possible, we calculated standardised mean differences (SMDs) to account for variable outcome measures with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We conducted meta-analyses using a random-effects model. Where we could not combine data in meta-analysis, we followed recommended Cochrane methods and reported results in accordance with 'Synthesis without meta-analysis' (SWiM) guidelines. We conducted assessments of risk of bias and evaluated the certainty of evidence (GRADE approach) using Cochrane procedures.

Main results: We included an additional 14 trials in this update, bringing the total number of included trials in the review to 39 trials with 83 trial arms and 6489 participants. Of these, the majority were conducted in Australia and the USA (n = 15 each). Nine were RCTs and 30 were cluster-RCTs. Twelve trials tested strategies to implement healthy eating practices; 17 physical activity, two tobacco, one alcohol, and seven a combination of risk factors. All trials used multiple implementation strategies, the most common being educational materials, educational meetings, and education outreach visits, or academic detailing. Of the 39 included trials, we judged 26 as having high risks of bias, 11 as having some concerns, and two as having low risk of bias across all domains. Pooled analyses found, relative to a control (no active implementation strategy), the use of implementation strategies probably results in a large increase in the implementation of interventions in schools (SMD 0.95, 95% CI 0.71, 1.19; I2 = 78%; 30 trials, 4912 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). This is equivalent to a 0.76 increase in the implementation of seven physical activity intervention components when the SMD is re-expressed using an implementation measure from a selected included trial. Subgroup analyses by school type and targeted health behaviour or risk factor did not identify any differential effects, and only one study was included that was implemented at scale. Compared to a control (no active implementation strategy), no unintended consequences or adverse effects of interventions were identified in the 11 trials that reported assessing them (1595 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Nine trials compared costs between groups with and without an implementation strategy and the results of these comparisons were mixed (2136 participants; low-certainty evidence). A lack of consistent terminology describing implementation strategies was an important limitation of the review.

Authors' conclusions: We found the use of implementation strategies probably results in large increases in implementation of interventions targeting healthy eating, physical activity, tobacco and/or alcohol use. While the effectiveness of individual implementation strategies could not be determined, such examination will likely be possible in future updates as data from new trials can be synthesised. Such research will further guide efforts to facilitate the translation of evidence into practice in this setting. The review will be maintained as a living systematic review.

加强执行针对饮食、体育活动、肥胖、吸烟或饮酒的校本政策或做法的战略。
背景:一系列以学校为基础的干预措施在改善学生饮食和身体活动(如学校食品政策干预措施和课堂身体活动干预措施)以及减少肥胖、吸烟和/或饮酒(如烟草控制规划和酒精教育规划)方面是有效的。然而,学校在实施这种基于证据的干预措施方面往往不成功。目的:主要审查目标是评估旨在改善学校实施干预措施的战略的有效性,以解决学生(5至18岁)的饮食、体育活动、肥胖、吸烟和/或酗酒问题。次要目标是:1。根据干预措施的特点(包括学校类型和干预措施针对的健康行为或风险因素)确定效果是否不同;2. 描述策略对学校、教职员或学生的意外后果和不利影响;和3。描述战略的成本或成本效益。检索方法:检索了CENTRAL、MEDLINE (Ovid)、Embase (Ovid)、另外5个数据库、世界卫生组织(WHO)国际临床试验注册平台(ICTRP)和美国国立卫生研究院注册库(clinicaltrials.gov)。最近一次检索是在2021年5月1日至2023年6月30日之间,以确定自上次发表的综述以来发表的任何相关试验。选择标准:我们将“实施”定义为使用策略采用和整合循证卫生干预措施,并在特定环境中改变实践模式。我们纳入了在学校环境中进行的任何规模的随机对照试验(RCT)或集群RCT,并纳入了一个平行对照组,该对照组比较了改善政策或实践的实施策略,以解决学生(5至18岁)的饮食、身体活动、肥胖、烟草使用和/或酒精使用的问题,与没有积极实施策略(即没有干预,包括常规做法,最低限度的支持)或不同的实施策略。资料收集与分析:采用标准Cochrane方法。考虑到报告的大量结果,我们选择并纳入了使用决策层次(即连续优于二分类、最有效、总分优于子得分)的单个结果测量对每个试验的主要结果的影响。在可能的情况下,我们计算了标准化平均差异(SMDs),以95%置信区间(CI)来解释可变的结果测量。我们使用随机效应模型进行了meta分析。当我们无法在meta分析中合并数据时,我们遵循Cochrane推荐的方法,并按照“不进行meta分析的综合”(SWiM)指南报告结果。我们使用Cochrane程序进行了偏倚风险评估和证据确定性评估(GRADE方法)。主要结果:我们在本次更新中纳入了另外14项试验,使纳入的试验总数达到39项试验,共有83个试验组和6489名受试者。其中,大多数是在澳大利亚和美国进行的(n = 15)。9例为随机对照试验,30例为集群随机对照试验。12项试验测试了实施健康饮食习惯的策略;17项体力活动,2项吸烟,1项饮酒,7项综合风险因素。所有试验采用多种实施策略,最常见的是教材、教育会议、教育外展访问或学术细节。在纳入的39项试验中,我们判断26项具有高偏倚风险,11项存在一些担忧,2项在所有领域具有低偏倚风险。综合分析发现,相对于对照组(没有积极的实施策略),实施策略的使用可能导致学校干预措施实施的大幅增加(SMD 0.95, 95% CI 0.71, 1.19;I2 = 78%;30项试验,4912名受试者;moderate-certainty证据)。当使用来自选定的纳入试验的实施措施重新表达SMD时,这相当于七个身体活动干预组成部分的实施增加了0.76。按学校类型和目标健康行为或风险因素进行的亚组分析没有发现任何差异影响,而且只纳入了一项大规模实施的研究。与对照组(没有积极的实施策略)相比,在报告评估干预措施的11项试验中(1595名参与者;moderate-certainty证据)。9项试验比较了有和没有实施策略的组之间的成本,这些比较的结果是混合的(2136名参与者;确定性的证据)。缺乏描述执行战略的一致术语是审查的一个重要限制。 作者的结论:我们发现实施策略的使用可能会导致针对健康饮食、体育活动、烟草和/或酒精使用的干预措施的实施大幅增加。虽然无法确定个别实施策略的有效性,但由于可以综合新试验的数据,在未来的更新中可能会进行这种检查。这种研究将进一步指导在这种情况下促进将证据转化为实践的努力。该审查将作为一个活的系统审查来维持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.60
自引率
2.40%
发文量
173
审稿时长
1-2 weeks
期刊介绍: The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) stands as the premier database for systematic reviews in healthcare. It comprises Cochrane Reviews, along with protocols for these reviews, editorials, and supplements. Owned and operated by Cochrane, a worldwide independent network of healthcare stakeholders, the CDSR (ISSN 1469-493X) encompasses a broad spectrum of health-related topics, including health services.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信