Identifying the value and impact of brief advice around physical activity on adherence to a local exercise on referral scheme

Physiotherapy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 113 ◽  
pp. e90
Author(s):  
C. Moss
2017 ◽  
Vol 67 (663) ◽  
pp. e668-e675 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Chatterjee ◽  
Tim Chapman ◽  
Mike GT Brannan ◽  
Justin Varney

BackgroundPhysical activity (PA) brief advice in health care is effective at getting individuals active. It has been suggested that one in four people would be more active if advised by a GP or nurse, but as many as 72% of GPs do not discuss the benefits of physical activity with patients.AimTo assess the knowledge, use, and confidence in national PA and Chief Medical Officer (CMO) health guidelines and tools among GPs in England.Design and settingOnline questionnaire-based survey of self-selecting GPs in England that took place over a 10-day period in March 2016.MethodThe questionnaire consisted of six multiple-choice questions and was available on the Doctors.net.uk (DNUK) homepage. Quotas were used to ensure good regional representation.ResultsThe final analysis included 1013 responses. Only 20% of responders were broadly or very familiar with the national PA guidelines. In all, 70% of GPs were aware of the General Practice Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPPAQ), but 26% were not familiar with any PA assessment tools, and 55% reported that they had not undertaken any training with respect to encouraging PA.ConclusionThe majority of GPs in England (80%) are unfamiliar with the national PA guidelines. Awareness of the recommended tool for assessment, GPPAQ, is higher than use by GPs. This may be because it is used by other clinical staff, for example, as part of the NHS Health Check programme. Although brief advice in isolation by GPs on PA will only be a part of the behaviour change journey, it is an important prompt, especially if repeated as part of routine practice. This study highlights the need for significant improvement in knowledge, skills, and confidence to maximise the potential for PA advice in GP consultations.


Author(s):  
Jaishri Sooknarine-Rajpatty ◽  
Austin B. Auyeung ◽  
Frank Doyle

Physical activity and obesity counselling have both been gaining increasing interest in preventive health and treatment. However, most healthcare professionals do not provide advice on these topics nearly as often as they should. There are many reasons for this. Common barriers for the provision of brief advice on physical activity and obesity in both primary and secondary care are lack of time, motivation and knowledge. Systematic reviews have been published on the barriers of physical activity and obesity counselling in the primary care setting, but there is no published work on the barriers present in secondary care. This systematic review aims to assess all published data that discuss the barriers of physical activity and obesity counselling as noted by healthcare providers in secondary care. Four databases will be searched using the same search strategy, and the findings will be compiled using the COM-B model to explore the frequency of a reported barrier. This systematic review will be beneficial not only to practicing healthcare providers, but also the educational and managerial staff of secondary care facilities, as it may highlight the need for further training to fill gaps in the provision of preventive healthcare.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert J. Copeland ◽  
Anna Myers ◽  
Helen Quirk ◽  
Helen Crank ◽  
David Broom ◽  
...  

In 2014 Public Health England (PHE) launched the national physical activity (PA) framework ‘Everybody Active, Everyday’. The framework included a key domain for action called ‘Moving Professionals’. The Moving Professionals Programme aimed to build expertise and leadership across key professional sectors and to raise awareness and understanding of the health benefits of PA among professionals and the wider public. The Moving Professionals Programme comprised a number of innovative work packages that are described elsewhere (See Brannan et al., 2019). The Physical Activity Clinical Advice Pad (PACAP) pilot was one element of the Moving Professionals Programme, and aimed to; increase the number of primary healthcare professionals (HCPs) in England who integrate brief advice on PA into their routine clinical practice.The PACAP provides advice about the amount and type of PA required to improve health and was designed to look like a prescription pad to aid compliance with the advice provided. It also provides tips on different ways to become more active and signposts users to the PHE Active 10 app and One You website. The purpose of the PACAP was to prompt and facilitate conversations about PA between HCPs and patients.In 2017, PHE and Sport England invited expressions of interest (EoIs) from Local Authority (LA) and Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) partnerships across England to engage in the pilot. Twenty-five applications were returned and ten partnerships were invited to take part in the PACAP pilot.As part of the National Centre for Sport and Exercise Medicine (NCSEM) network, academics at Sheffield Hallam University (SHU) were commissioned to conduct an independent evaluation of the PACAP pilot. The NCSEM were not responsible for the implementation or delivery of the PACAP pilot. The evaluation adopted a mixed methods approach to explore the acceptability of the PACAP pilot. Data was collected from patients and HCPs using surveys, telephone interviews, focus groups and audits between April 2018 and February 2019. This report details the evaluation findings, provides recommendation for future iterations of the project and provides implications for scaling the PACAP across additional localities in England.


2013 ◽  
Vol 48 (3) ◽  
pp. 202-206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nana K Anokye ◽  
Joanne Lord ◽  
Julia Fox-Rushby

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
pp. e020042
Author(s):  
Danika Tremain ◽  
Megan Freund ◽  
Paula Wye ◽  
Jenny Bowman ◽  
Luke Wolfenden ◽  
...  

ObjectivesTo evaluate the potential effectiveness of a practice change intervention in increasing preventive care provision in community-based substance use treatment services. In addition, client and clinician acceptability of care were examined.DesignA pre-post trial conducted from May 2012 to May 2014.SettingPublic community-based substance use treatment services (n=15) in one health district in New South Wales (NSW), Australia.ParticipantsSurveys were completed by 226 clients and 54 clinicians at baseline and 189 clients and 46 clinicians at follow-up.InterventionsA 12-month multistrategic clinician practice change intervention that aimed to increase the provision of preventive care for smoking, insufficient fruit and/or vegetable consumption and insufficient physical activity.Primary and secondary outcome measuresClient and clinician reported provision of assessment, brief advice and referral for three modifiable health risk behaviours: smoking, insufficient fruit and/or vegetable consumption and insufficient physical activity. Clinician-reported optimal care was defined as providing care to 80% of clients or more. Client acceptability and clinician attitudes towards preventive care were assessed at follow-up.ResultsIncreases in client reported care were observed for insufficient fruit and/or vegetable consumption including: assessment (24% vs 54%, p<0.001), brief advice (26% vs 46%, p<0.001), and clinicians speaking about (10% vs 31%, p<0.001) and arranging a referral (1% vs 8%, p=0.006) to telephone helplines. Clinician reported optimal care delivery increased for: assessment of insufficient fruit and/or vegetable consumption (22% vs 63%, p<0.001) and speaking about telephone helplines for each of the three health risk behaviours. Overall, clients and clinicians held favourable views regarding preventive care.ConclusionThis study reported increases in preventive care for insufficient fruit and/or vegetable consumption; however, minimal increases were observed for smoking or insufficient physical activity. Further investigation of the barriers to preventive care delivery in community substance use settings is needed.TrialregistrationnumberACTRN12614000469617.


JAMA ◽  
1966 ◽  
Vol 197 (11) ◽  
pp. 891-893 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. P. Novak

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document