An online family-based self-monitoring and goal-setting intervention to improve children’s physical activity: the FRESH feasibility trial and three-arm pilot RCT

E. V. van Sluijs, H. Brown, E. Coombes, Claire Hughes, Andrew P. Jones, Katie L Morton, J. Guagliano
{"title":"An online family-based self-monitoring and goal-setting intervention to improve children’s physical activity: the FRESH feasibility trial and three-arm pilot RCT","authors":"E. V. van Sluijs, H. Brown, E. Coombes, Claire Hughes, Andrew P. Jones, Katie L Morton, J. Guagliano","doi":"10.3310/phr09090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Family-based physical activity promotion presents a promising avenue for promoting whole-family physical activity, but high-quality research is lacking.\n \n \n \n To assess the feasibility, acceptability and preliminary effectiveness of FRESH (Families Reporting Every Step to Health), a child-led online family-based physical activity intervention; and to identify effective and resource-efficient family recruitment strategies.\n \n \n \n The project consisted of (1) a randomised feasibility trial, (2) a randomised controlled pilot trial and (3) a systematic review and Delphi study.\n \n \n \n Norfolk/Suffolk counties, UK.\n \n \n \n Families, recruited from schools, workplaces and community settings, were eligible to participate if one child aged 7–11 years and one adult responsible for their care provided written consent; all family members could participate.\n \n \n \n The FRESH intervention, guided by self-determination theory, targeted whole families and was delivered via an online platform. All family members received pedometers and were given website access to select family step challenges to ‘travel’ to target cities around the world, log steps, and track progress as they virtually globetrotted. Families were randomised to FRESH intervention, pedometer-only or control arm.\n \n \n \n Physical (e.g. blood pressure), psychosocial (e.g. family functioning) and behavioural (e.g. device-measured family physical activity) measures were collected at baseline and at 8- and 52-week follow-up. A mixed-methods process evaluation assessed the acceptability of the intervention and evaluation.\n \n \n \n Systematic search of four databases (Cochrane Library, PubMed, PsycINFO and SCOPUS).\n \n \n \n Articles were screened in duplicate, and data extraction was fully checked. Academic experts participated in the three-round Delphi study. Data were combined to identify effective and resource-efficient family recruitment strategies.\n \n \n \n Included generally healthy school-aged children and at least one adult; intervention attempted to change physical activity, sedentary behaviour, screen use, diet, or prevent overweight/obesity in multiple family members; presented relevant measure of effect in children and adults.\n \n \n \n The feasibility study (12 families, 32 participants; 100% retention at 8 weeks) demonstrated the feasibility and acceptability of FRESH, but highlighted that adaptations were required. Of 41 families recruited in the pilot study (149 participants), 98% and 88% were retained at the 8-week and 52-week follow-up, respectively. More children in the FRESH arm self-reported doing more family physical activity, and they thought that FRESH was fun. There were no notable between-group differences in children’s outcomes. Change in moderate to vigorous physical activity at 8 weeks favoured FRESH intervention adults [vs. control: 9.4 minutes/week (95% confidence interval 0.4 to 18.4) vs. pedometer only: 15.3 (95% confidence interval 6.0 to 24.5)], and was stronger in fathers, but this was not maintained. In 49 included studies, apart from recruitment settings and strategies used (reported in 84% and 73% of the studies, respectively), recruitment details were scarce. School-based recruitment was predominant. The Delphi study identified a wide range of recruitment settings and strategies.\n \n \n \n Recruitment was the main limitation of the FRESH studies; generalisability of the proposed recruitment strategies may be limited.\n \n \n \n This study has demonstrated the feasibility and acceptability of the FRESH intervention. However, we failed to recruit the target sample size and were unable to demonstrate a signal of effectiveness. Future research should employ a multifaceted recruitment approach.\n \n \n \n Further refinements to intervention delivery and recruitment methods should be investigated.\n \n \n \n Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN12789422 and PROSPERO CRD42019140042.\n \n \n \n This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme and will be published in full in Public Health Research; Vol. 9, No. 9. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.","PeriodicalId":32306,"journal":{"name":"Public Health Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Health Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3310/phr09090","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Family-based physical activity promotion presents a promising avenue for promoting whole-family physical activity, but high-quality research is lacking. To assess the feasibility, acceptability and preliminary effectiveness of FRESH (Families Reporting Every Step to Health), a child-led online family-based physical activity intervention; and to identify effective and resource-efficient family recruitment strategies. The project consisted of (1) a randomised feasibility trial, (2) a randomised controlled pilot trial and (3) a systematic review and Delphi study. Norfolk/Suffolk counties, UK. Families, recruited from schools, workplaces and community settings, were eligible to participate if one child aged 7–11 years and one adult responsible for their care provided written consent; all family members could participate. The FRESH intervention, guided by self-determination theory, targeted whole families and was delivered via an online platform. All family members received pedometers and were given website access to select family step challenges to ‘travel’ to target cities around the world, log steps, and track progress as they virtually globetrotted. Families were randomised to FRESH intervention, pedometer-only or control arm. Physical (e.g. blood pressure), psychosocial (e.g. family functioning) and behavioural (e.g. device-measured family physical activity) measures were collected at baseline and at 8- and 52-week follow-up. A mixed-methods process evaluation assessed the acceptability of the intervention and evaluation. Systematic search of four databases (Cochrane Library, PubMed, PsycINFO and SCOPUS). Articles were screened in duplicate, and data extraction was fully checked. Academic experts participated in the three-round Delphi study. Data were combined to identify effective and resource-efficient family recruitment strategies. Included generally healthy school-aged children and at least one adult; intervention attempted to change physical activity, sedentary behaviour, screen use, diet, or prevent overweight/obesity in multiple family members; presented relevant measure of effect in children and adults. The feasibility study (12 families, 32 participants; 100% retention at 8 weeks) demonstrated the feasibility and acceptability of FRESH, but highlighted that adaptations were required. Of 41 families recruited in the pilot study (149 participants), 98% and 88% were retained at the 8-week and 52-week follow-up, respectively. More children in the FRESH arm self-reported doing more family physical activity, and they thought that FRESH was fun. There were no notable between-group differences in children’s outcomes. Change in moderate to vigorous physical activity at 8 weeks favoured FRESH intervention adults [vs. control: 9.4 minutes/week (95% confidence interval 0.4 to 18.4) vs. pedometer only: 15.3 (95% confidence interval 6.0 to 24.5)], and was stronger in fathers, but this was not maintained. In 49 included studies, apart from recruitment settings and strategies used (reported in 84% and 73% of the studies, respectively), recruitment details were scarce. School-based recruitment was predominant. The Delphi study identified a wide range of recruitment settings and strategies. Recruitment was the main limitation of the FRESH studies; generalisability of the proposed recruitment strategies may be limited. This study has demonstrated the feasibility and acceptability of the FRESH intervention. However, we failed to recruit the target sample size and were unable to demonstrate a signal of effectiveness. Future research should employ a multifaceted recruitment approach. Further refinements to intervention delivery and recruitment methods should be investigated. Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN12789422 and PROSPERO CRD42019140042. This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme and will be published in full in Public Health Research; Vol. 9, No. 9. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
基于家庭的在线自我监测和目标设定干预改善儿童体育活动:FRESH可行性试验和三组试点随机对照试验
以家庭为基础的体育活动促进为促进全家庭体育活动提供了一条很有前途的途径,但缺乏高质量的研究。评估FRESH(家庭向健康报告每一步)的可行性、可接受性和初步有效性,这是一项由儿童主导的在线家庭体育活动干预;以及确定有效和资源节约型的家庭招聘战略。该项目包括(1)随机可行性试验,(2)随机对照试验和(3)系统综述和德尔菲研究。英国诺福克郡/萨福克郡。从学校、工作场所和社区招募的家庭,如果一名7-11岁的儿童和一名负责照顾他们的成年人提供书面同意,则有资格参加;所有家庭成员都可以参加。FRESH的干预以自决理论为指导,针对整个家庭,并通过在线平台进行。所有家庭成员都收到了计步器,并可以访问网站,选择家庭步骤挑战,“旅行”到世界各地的目标城市,记录步骤,并在他们虚拟环球旅行时跟踪进度。家庭被随机分为FRESH干预组、仅计步器组或对照组。在基线以及8周和52周的随访中收集身体(如血压)、心理社会(如家庭功能)和行为(如设备测量的家庭体力活动)指标。混合方法过程评估评估了干预和评估的可接受性。系统检索四个数据库(Cochrane Library、PubMed、PsycINFO和SCOPUS)。对文章进行了一式两份的筛选,并对数据提取进行了全面检查。学术专家参与了三轮德尔菲研究。将数据结合起来,以确定有效和资源节约型的家庭招聘策略。包括一般健康的学龄儿童和至少一名成年人;干预措施试图改变多个家庭成员的体育活动、久坐行为、屏幕使用、饮食或预防超重/肥胖;介绍了在儿童和成人中的相关效果测量。可行性研究(12个家庭,32名参与者;8周时100%保留)证明了FRESH的可行性和可接受性,但强调需要适应。在试点研究中招募的41个家庭(149名参与者)中,分别有98%和88%在8周和52周的随访中被保留。在FRESH组中,更多的孩子自我报告做了更多的家庭体育活动,他们认为FRESH很有趣。儿童的结果在组间没有显著差异。8周时,中度至剧烈体力活动的变化有利于FRESH干预的成年人[与对照组相比:9.4分钟/周(95%置信区间0.4至18.4)与仅使用计步器相比:15.3(95%可信区间6.0至24.5)],父亲的体力活动更强,但这一点没有得到维持。在49项纳入的研究中,除了招募环境和使用的策略(分别有84%和73%的研究报告)外,招募细节很少。学校招聘占主导地位。德尔菲研究确定了广泛的招聘环境和策略。招聘是FRESH研究的主要局限性;拟议招聘策略的通用性可能有限。本研究证明了FRESH干预的可行性和可接受性。然而,我们未能招募到目标样本量,也无法证明有效性的信号。未来的研究应该采用多方面的招聘方法。应调查对提供干预和征聘方法的进一步改进。当前对照试验ISRCTN12789422和PROSPERO CRD42019140042。该项目由国家卫生研究所公共卫生研究计划资助,并将在《公共卫生研究》上全文发表;第9卷,第9期。有关更多项目信息,请访问NIHR期刊图书馆网站。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
审稿时长
46 weeks
×
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