Experiences in physical activity promotion in health care settings for primary prevention in the UK

2014 ◽  
Vol 62 (2) ◽  

In addition to the delivery of primary care services, recent changes to the NHS in the United Kingdom have placed increasing responsibility on GPs for the commissioning of the full range of health services from prevention through to clinical interventions and rehabilitation. Whilst historically there has always been an expectation that primary care professionals were ideally placed to provide support for prevention as well as treatment, their active engagement in the promotion of physical activity has remained largely superficial. With notable exceptions where individuals have a personal interest or commitment, the majority of health professionals tend to limit themselves to peremptory non-specific advice at best, or frequently don’t broach the subject at all. There are a number of reasons for this including increasing time pressures, a general lack of knowledge, limited evidence and concerns about litigation in the event of an adverse exercise induced event. However in the 1990s there was a surge of interest in the emerging “Exercise on Prescription” model where patients could be referred to community based exercise instructors for a structured “prescription” of exercise in community leisure centres. Despite the continuing popularity of the model there remain problems particularly in getting the active support of health professionals who generally cite the same barriers as previously identified. In an attempt to overcome some of these problems Wales established a national exercise referral scheme with an associated randomised controlled trial. The scheme evaluated well and had subsequently evolved with new developments including integration with secondary and tertiary care pathways, accredited training for exercise instructors and exit routes into alternative community based exercise opportunities.

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Pierre Laake ◽  
Joanna Fleming

Abstract Background Physical inactivity is the fourth leading risk factor for global mortality. Reducing sedentary behaviour and increasing physical activity are efficacious for improving many physical and mental health conditions including cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes and depression. Reducing sedentary behaviour and increasing physical activity can also be effective at reducing obesity; however, sedentary behaviour and reduced physical activity are also associated with mortality independently. Despite this, most adults in the UK do not currently meet the UK Chief Medical Officers’ guidelines for weekly physical activity. As most adults visit their general practitioner at least once a year, the primary care consultation provides a unique opportunity to deliver exercise referral or physical activity promotion interventions. This is a protocol for a systematic review of randomised controlled trials for the effectiveness of physical activity promotion and referral in primary care. Methods A comprehensive literature search of Embase, MEDLINE (Ovid), Web of Science (Core Collection), Scopus, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and The Cochrane Library (CENTRAL) will be conducted for studies with a minimum follow-up of 12 months that report physical activity as an outcome measure (by either self-report or objective measures) including an intention to treat analysis. The authors will screen papers, first by title and abstract and then by full text, independently assess studies for inclusion, appraise risk of bias and extract data. The quality of the evidence will be assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluations) approach. The primary outcome will be participation in physical activity at 12 months. Pooled effects will be calculated using random effects models. Results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and for presentation at UK national primary care conferences. Discussion This systematic review and meta-analyses will summarise the evidence for the effectiveness of physical activity promotion and referral as interventions for improving physical activity, as well as whether studies using objective measures of physical activity have similar effects to those studies using self-report measures. This knowledge has importance for primary care clinicians, patients and, given the focus of the recent NHS long-term plan on preventive medicine, those making policy decisions. Systematic review registration The protocol is registered with PROSPERO the international prospective register of systematic reviews, ID CRD42019130831


2014 ◽  
Vol 62 (2) ◽  

The role of regular physical activity for population health has been clearly documented. Improvements in population levels of physical activity require long-term implementation of a combination of measures, including the evidence based approaches described in the “seven best investments for physical activity” (www.globalpa.org.uk): whole-of-school programmes, transport, urban planning, integration of physical activity promotion into primary health care systems, public education, community-wide programmes, sport for all. The health care setting has a particular role in this context, particularly in its access to physically inactive individuals. Switzerland has seen a number of successful research projects in this field, but there has been no wide adaptation of these approaches in the medical community. In recent years, a group of institutions including the Swiss College of Primary Care Medicine, the Policlinique Médicale Universitaire in Lausanne, the Ligue Vaudoise contre les Maladies Cardiovasculaires and the Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine of the University of Zurich have therefore focussed on the development of a physical activity counselling approach based on international evidence as well as on established tools, but streamlined to the specific demands of primary health care providers in Switzerland. PAPRICA (Physical Activity Promotion in Primary Care, www.paprica.ch) has been the result of these developments, and nearly 300 health professionals, most of them primary care physicians, have been successfully trained so far. PAPRICA is implemented together with the Swiss Society for Sports Medicine and a number of regional partners. The development of a national programme structure is currently under preparation. This will allow Switzerland to explore and better use the potential of physicians and other health professionals in the promotion of physical activity and in the fight against non-communicable diseases.


BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. e030902 ◽  
Author(s):  
Justin M Guagliano ◽  
Helen Elizabeth Brown ◽  
Emma Coombes ◽  
Elizabeth S Haines ◽  
Claire Hughes ◽  
...  

IntroductionFamily-based physical activity (PA) interventions present a promising avenue to promote children’s activity; however, high-quality experimental research is lacking. This paper describes the protocol for the FRESH (Families Reporting Every Step to Health) pilot trial, a child-led family-based PA intervention delivered online.Methods and analysisFRESH is a three-armed, parallel-group, randomised controlled pilot trial using a 1:1:1 allocation ratio with follow-up assessments at 8 and 52 weeks postbaseline. Families will be eligible if a minimum of one child in school Years 3–6 (aged 7–11 years) and at least one adult responsible for that child are willing to participate. Family members can take part in the intervention irrespective of their participation in the accompanying evaluation and vice versa.Following baseline assessment, families will be randomly allocated to one of three arms: (1) FRESH; (2) pedometer-only or (3) no-intervention control. All family members in the pedometer-only and FRESH arms receive pedometers and generic PA promotion information. FRESH families additionally receive access to the intervention website; allowing participants to select step challenges to ‘travel’ to target cities around the world, log steps and track progress as they virtually globetrot. Control families will receive no treatment. All family members will be eligible to participate in the evaluation with two follow-ups (8 and 52 weeks). Physical (eg, fitness and blood pressure), psychosocial (eg, social support) and behavioural (eg, objectively measured family PA) measures will be collected at each time point. At 8-week follow-up, a mixed methods process evaluation will be conducted (questionnaires and family focus groups) assessing acceptability of the intervention and evaluation. FRESH families’ website engagement will also be explored.Ethics and disseminationThis study received ethical approval from the Ethics Committee for the School of the Humanities and Social Sciences at the University of Cambridge. Findings will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, conferences and to participating families.Trial registration numberISRCTN12789422


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sharon Ann Carstairs ◽  
Rayna H Rogowsky ◽  
Kathryn B Cunningham ◽  
Frank Sullivan ◽  
Gozde Ozakinci

Abstract Background Inconclusive evidence in support of referrals from health professionals to gym-based exercise programmes has raised a concern for the roll-out of such schemes and highlights the importance of developing and maintaining links between primary care settings and community-based opportunities to improve physical activity levels. This study aimed to identify methods of connecting primary care patients to community-based physical activity opportunities, using the example of jog scotland , and to explore what factors can facilitate this connection. Methods We conducted a qualitative exploratory study utilising semi-structured interviews with primary care patients (n=14) and health professionals (HP) (n=14) from one UK National Health Service (NHS) board. We analysed the transcripts separately for patients and HPs using thematic analysis and synthesised them for potential methods of connection. Sub-themes for patients and HPs were mapped onto relevant components of the capability, opportunity, motivation behavioural (COM-B) model and theoretical domains framework (TDF) to identify barriers and facilitators for connecting primary care to community jog scotland groups. Results Three potential methods of connecting patients to community-based jog scotland groups were identified: informal passive signposting, informal active signposting, and formal referral or prescribing. Barriers and facilitators to connecting patients to jog scotland groups fell into five TDF domains for HPs and two COM-B model components for patients. Conclusions Our findings suggest that for patients, the acknowledgement and raising of the topic of physical activity improvement by their HP can help to justify as well as facilitate and motivate action to change. The workload associated with connecting patients to community-based opportunities is central to the implementation by HPs. Resource solutions (e.g. intermediary person or community information hub) and social support opportunities for patients (e.g. meet and greet) can provide patients with a greater variety of physical activity options and the vital information and support for connecting with local community-based opportunities, such as jog scotland .


Author(s):  
Justin M. Guagliano ◽  
Sofie M. Armitage ◽  
Helen Elizabeth Brown ◽  
Emma Coombes ◽  
Francesco Fusco ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction This study assessed the feasibility and acceptability of FRESH (Families Reporting Every Step to Health), a theory-based child-led family physical activity (PA) intervention delivered online. We also assessed the preliminary effectiveness of the intervention on outcomes of interest and whether pre-specified criteria were met to progress to a full-scale definitive trial. Methods In a three-armed randomised pilot trial, 41 families (with a 7–11-year-old index child) were allocated to a: ‘family’ (FAM), ‘pedometer-only’ (PED), or a no-treatment control (CON) arm. The FAM arm received access to the FRESH website, allowing participants to select step challenges to ‘travel’ to target cities around the world, log their steps, and track progress as families virtually globetrot. FAM and PED arms also received family sets of pedometers. All family members could participate in the evaluation. Physical (e.g., fitness, blood pressure), psychosocial (e.g., social support), behavioural (e.g., objectively-measured PA), and economic (e.g., expenditure for PA) data were collected at baseline, 8- and 52-weeks. Results At 8- and 52-weeks, 98 and 88% of families were retained, respectively. Most children liked participating in the study (> 90%) and thought it was fun (> 80%). Compared to the PED (45%) and CON (39%) arms, a higher percentage of children in the FAM (81%) arm reported doing more activities with their family. Adults agreed that FRESH encouraged their family do more PA and made their family more aware of the amount of PA they do. No notable between-group differences were found for childrens’ minutes in moderate-to-vigorous PA. Sizeable changes of 9.4 (95%CI: 0.4, 18.4) and 15.3 (95%CI: 6.0, 24.5) minutes in moderate-to-vigorous PA was found for adults in the FAM group compared to those in the PED or CON groups, respectively. No other notable differences were found. Conclusion This study demonstrates feasibility and acceptability of the FRESH intervention. All progression criteria were at least partially satisfied. However, we failed to recruit the target sample size and did not find a signal of effectiveness on PA particularly long-term or in children. Further refinements are required to progress to a full-scale trial. Trial registration This study was prospectively registered (ISRCTN12789422) on 16/03/2016.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document