Examining reach, dose, and fidelity of the "Girls on the Move" after-school physical activity club: a process evaluation

Lorraine B Robbins, Jiying Ling, Ebru Kilicarslan Toruner, Kelly A Bourne, Karin A Pfeiffer, Lorraine B Robbins, Jiying Ling, Ebru Kilicarslan Toruner, Kelly A Bourne, Karin A Pfeiffer

Abstract

Background: After-school programs represent a promising opportunity to assist adolescent girls' in attaining adequate physical activity. Although evaluating the process of intervention implementation is important for determining if an intervention was delivered and received as intended, comprehensive information about process evaluation methods and results are rarely reported. The purpose of this article was to evaluate the reach, dose, and fidelity of a 90-minute after-school physical activity club offered 3 days a week. The club is 1 of 3 components included in a 17-week intervention designed for 5th-8th grade girls, the majority of whom were of minority and/or low socioeconomic status.

Methods: A total of 24 schools (12 intervention; 12 control) and 56-67 girls per school (total N = 1519 girls) were included in the Girls on the Move group randomized controlled trial. At the beginning of each of 3 academic years (2012-2015), 8 schools per year were randomized to receive either the intervention (n = 4) or control condition (n = 4). To evaluate the club, data collected via surveys from girls, club coaches and managers, and process evaluators were analyzed. To evaluate the opportunity for physical activity provided by the coaches and managers, process evaluators used an observation tool based on the System for Observing Fitness Instruction Time and Academic Learning Time - Physical Education. Girls wore accelerometers every other week during the club time.

Results: Mean attendance was 41 % with the average attendance in year 3 being higher than rates for years 1 or 2. Mean moderate-to-vigorous physical activity time was 21.85 minutes measured via accelerometry and 21.81 minutes observed by process evaluators. Satisfaction with the intervention was high. For the most part, process evaluators perceived the club was delivered as planned and reflected constructs of the Health Promotion Model and Self-Determination Theory. Areas contributing to success included using incentives and offering a variety of activities. Issues negatively impacting implementation included managing behavioral problems, having limited space for moderate-to-vigorous physical activity, dealing with inclement weather, and getting coaches to actively participate in all physical activities with the girls.

Conclusions: This process evaluation provides important information to guide future school-based physical activity intervention delivery. Barriers to implementation have been identified. Ways to overcome them warrant consideration when designing physical activity interventions. Research is needed to test innovative approaches for enhancing attendance and increasing girls' moderate-to-vigorous physical activity in after-school programs.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01503333 . Registered 23 December, 2011.

Keywords: Adolescents; Females; Intervention; Randomized controlled trial; School.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Origin and flow of participants in the study (N = 1519)

References

    1. Kumar B, Robinson R, Till S. Physical activity and health in adolescence. Clin Med (Lond) 2015;15:267–72. doi: 10.7861/clinmedicine.15-3-267.
    1. Ortega FB, Ruiz JR, Hurtig-Wennlöf A, Vicente-Rodriguez G, Rizzo NS, Castillo MJ, Sjöström M. Cardiovascular fitness modifies the associations between physical activity and abdominal adiposity in children and adolescents: the European Youth Heart Study. Br J Sports Med. 2010;44:256–62. doi: 10.1136/bjsm.2008.046391.
    1. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services: 2008 physical activity guidelines for Americans. Washington: Author; 2008. []. Accessed 6 June 2016.
    1. Troiano RP, Berrigan D, Dodd KW, Mâsse LC, Tilert T, McDowell M. Physical activity in the United States measured by accelerometer. Med Sci Sports Exer. 2008;40:181–8. doi: 10.1249/mss.0b013e31815a51b3.
    1. Dumith SC, Gigante DP, Domingues MR, Kohl HW., 3rd Physical activity change during adolescence: a systematic review and a pooled analysis. Int J Epidemiol. 2011;40:685–98. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyq272.
    1. Nelson MC, Neumark-Stzainer D, Hannan PJ, Sirard JR, Story M. Longitudinal and secular trends in physical activity and sedentary behavior during adolescence. Pediatrics. 2006;118:e1627–34. doi: 10.1542/peds.2006-0926.
    1. Kann L, Kinchen S, Shanklin SL, Flint KH, Kawkins J, Harris WA, Lowry R, Olsen EO, McManus T, Chyen D, et al. Youth risk behavior surveillance--United States, 2013. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2014;63(Suppl 4):1–168.
    1. Bailey DP, Fairclough SJ, Savory LA, Denton SJ, Pang D, Deane CS, Kerr CJ. Accelerometry-assessed sedentary behaviour and physical activity levels during the segmented school day in 10–14-year-old children: the HAPPY study. Eur J Pediatr. 2012;171:1805–13. doi: 10.1007/s00431-012-1827-0.
    1. Vasques C, Magalhães P, Cortinhas A, Mota P, Leitão J, Lopes VP. Effects of intervention programs on child and adolescent BMI: a meta-analysis study. J Phys Act Health. 2014;11:426–44. doi: 10.1123/jpah.2012-0035.
    1. Langford R, Bonell C, Jones H, Pouliou T, Murphy S, Waters E, Komro K, Gibbs L, Magnus D, Campbell R. The World Health Organization’s Health Promoting Schools framework: a Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Public Health. 2015;15:130. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-1360-y.
    1. Eather N, Morgan PJ, Lubans DR. Improving the fitness and physical activity levels of primary school children: results of the Fit-4-Fun group randomized controlled trial. Prev Med. 2013;56:12–9. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2012.10.019.
    1. Hayes LB, Van Camp CM. Increasing physical activity of children during school recess. J Appl Behav Anal. 2015;48:690–5. doi: 10.1002/jaba.222.
    1. Jago R, Edwards MJ, Sebire SJ, Tomkinson K, Bird EL, Banfield K, May T, Kesten JM, Cooper AR, Powell JE, et al. Effect and cost of an after-school dance programme on the physical activity of 11–12 year old girls: the Bristol Girls Dance Project, a school-based cluster randomised controlled trial. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2015;12:128. doi: 10.1186/s12966-015-0289-y.
    1. Kriemler S, Zahner L, Schindler C, Meyer U, Hartmann T, Hebestreit H, Brunner-La Rocca HP, van Mechelen W, Puder JJ. Effect of school based physical activity programme (KISS) on fitness and adiposity in primary schoolchildren: cluster randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2010;340:c785. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c785.
    1. Dobbins M, Husson H, DeCorby K, LaRocca RL. School-based physical activity programs for promoting physical activity and fitness in children and adolescents aged 6 to 18. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;2.
    1. Camacho-Miñano MJ, LaVoi NM, Barr-Anderson DJ. Interventions to promote physical activity among young and adolescent girls: a systematic review. Health Educ Res. 2011;26:1025–49. doi: 10.1093/her/cyr040.
    1. Webber LS, Catellier DJ, Lytle LA, Murray DM, Pratt CA, Young DR, Elder JP, Lohman TG, Stevens J, Jobe JB, Pate RR. Promoting physical activity in middle school girls: trial of activity for adolescent girls. Am J Prev Med. 2008;34:173–84. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2007.11.018.
    1. Pearson N, Braithwaite R, Biddle SJ. The effectiveness of interventions to increase physical activity among adolescent girls: a meta-analysis. Acad Pediatr. 2015;15:9–18. doi: 10.1016/j.acap.2014.08.009.
    1. Grant A, Treweek S, Dreischulte T, Foy R, Guthrie B. Process evaluations for cluster-randomised trials of complex interventions: a proposed framework for design and reporting. Trials. 2013;14:15. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-14-15.
    1. Moore GF, Audrey S, Barker M, Bond L, Bonell C, Hardeman W, Moore L, O’Cathain A, Tinati T, Wight D, Baird J. Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2015;350:h1258. doi: 10.1136/bmj.h1258.
    1. de Meij JS, van der Wal MF, van Mechelen W, Chinapaw MJ. A mixed methods process evaluation of the implementation of JUMP-in, a multilevel school-based intervention aimed at physical activity promotion. Health Promot Pract. 2013;14:777–90. doi: 10.1177/1524839912465750.
    1. Saunders RP. Implementation monitoring & process evaluation. Los Angeles: Sage; 2016.
    1. Young DR, Steckler A, Cohen S, Pratt C, Felton G, Moe SG, Pickrel J, Johnson CC, Grieser M, Lytle LA, Lee JS, Raburn B. Process evaluation results from a school- and community-linked intervention: the Trial of Activity for Adolescent Girls (TAAG) Health Educ Res. 2008;23:976–86. doi: 10.1093/her/cyn029.
    1. Glasgow RE, Linnan LA. Evaluation of theory-based interventions. In: Glanz K, Rimer BK, Viswanath K, editors. Health behavior and health education: theory, research, and practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2008.
    1. Linnan L, Steckler A. Process evaluation for public health interventions and research: an overview. In: Steckler A, Linnan L, editors. Process evaluation for public health interventions and research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2002.
    1. Green J, Tones K. Health promotion: planning and strategies. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2010.
    1. Robbins LB, Pfeiffer KA, Vermeesch A, Resnicow K, You ZY, An L, Wesolek SM. “Girls on the move” intervention protocol for increasing physical activity among low-active underserved urban girls: a group randomized trial. BMC Public Health. 2013;13:474. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-474.
    1. Bean CN, Forneris T, Halsall T. Girls just wanna have fun: a process evaluation of a female youth-driven physical activity-based life skills program. SpringerPlus. 2014;3:401. doi: 10.1186/2193-1801-3-401.
    1. Casey MM, Telford A, Mooney A, Harvey JT, Eime RM, Payne WR. Linking secondary school physical education with community sport and recreation for girls: a process evaluation. BMC Public Health. 2014;14:1039. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-14-1039.
    1. Jenkinson KA, Naughton G, Benson AC. The GLAMA (Girls! Lead! Achieve! Mentor! Activate!) physical activity and peer leadership intervention pilot project: a process evaluation using the RE-AIM framework. BMC Public Health. 2012;12:55. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-12-55.
    1. Saunders RP, Ward DS, Felton GM, Dowda M, Pate RR. Examining the link between program implementation and behavior outcomes in the lifestyle education for activity program (LEAP) Eval Program Plann. 2006;29:352–64. doi: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2006.08.006.
    1. Small L, Anderson D, Sidora-Arcoleo K, Gance-Cleveland B. Pediatric nurse practitioners’ assessment and management of childhood overweight/obesity: results from 1999 and 2005 cohort surveys. J Pediatr Health Care. 2009;23:231–41. doi: 10.1016/j.pedhc.2008.04.007.
    1. Pender NJ, Murdaugh CL, Parsons MA. Health promotion in nursing practice. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education; 2011.
    1. Ryan RM, Deci EL. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Am Psychol. 2000;55:68–78. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68.
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention School health guidelines to promote healthy eating and physical activity. MMWR. 2011;60(RR-05):1–71.
    1. Institute of Medicine . Educating the student body: taking physical activity and physical education to school. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2013.
    1. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Strategies to improve the quality of physical education. Washington: Author; 2010.
    1. Robinson TN, Killen JD, Kraemer HC, Wilson DM, Matheson DM, Haskell WL, Pruitt LA, Powell TM, Owens AS, Thompson NS, et al. Dance and reducing television viewing to prevent weight gain in African-American girls: the Stanford GEMS pilot study. Ethn Dis. 2003;13:S1-65–S65-77.
    1. Annesi JJ, Westcott WL, Faigenbaum AD, Unruh JL. Effects of a 12-week physical activity protocol delivered by YMCA after-school counselors (Youth Fit for Life) on fitness and self-efficacy changes in 5–12-year-old boys and girls. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2005;76:468–76. doi: 10.1080/02701367.2005.10599320.
    1. Jago R, Sebire SJ, Davies B, Wood L, Banfield K, Edwards MJ, Powell JE, Montgomery AA, Thompson JL, Fox KR. Increasing children’s physical activity through a teaching-assistant led extracurricular intervention: process evaluation of the action 3:30 randomised feasibility trial. BMC Public Health. 2015;15:156. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-1501-3.
    1. American Academy of Pediatrics. Media and children. []. Accessed 6 June 2016.
    1. Wilson D, Griffin S, Saunders RP, Kitzman-Ulrich H, Meyers DC, Mansard L. Using process evaluation for program improvement in dose, fidelity and reach: the ACT trial experience. Int Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2009;6:79. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-6-79.
    1. Rowe PJ, Schuldheisz JM, van der Mars H. Measuring physical activity in physical education: validation of the SOFIT direct observation instrument for use with first to eight grade students. Pediatr Exerc Sci. 1997;9:136–49.
    1. Parker M. Academic Learning Time-Physical Education (ALT-PE), 1982 revision. In: Darst PW, Zakrajsek DB, Mancini VH, editors. Analyzing physical education and sport instuction. Champaign: Human Kinetics; 1989.
    1. Hänggi JM, Phillips LRS, Rowlands AV. Validation of the GT3X ActiGraph in children and comparison with the GT1M ActiGraph. J Sci Med Sport. 2013;16:40–4. doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2012.05.012.
    1. Trost SG, Ward DS, Moorehead SM, Watson PD, Riner W, Burke JR. Validity of the computer science and applications (CSA) activity monitor in children. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1998;30:629–33. doi: 10.1097/00005768-199804000-00023.
    1. Evenson KR, Catellier DJ, Gill K, Ondrak KS, McMurray RG. Calibration of two objective measures of physical activity for children. J Sports Sci. 2008;26:1557–65. doi: 10.1080/02640410802334196.
    1. Trost SG, Loprinzi PD, Moore R, Pfeiffer KA. Comparison of accelerometer cut points for predicting activity intensity in youth. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011;43:1360–8. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e318206476e.
    1. Robbins LB, Pfeiffer KA, Wesolek SM, Lo YJ. Process evaluation for a school-based physical activity intervention for 6th- and 7th-grade boys: reach, dose, and fidelity. Eval Program Plann. 2014;42:21–31. doi: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2013.09.002.
    1. Fain JA. Reading, understanding, and applying nursing reseach. Philadelphia: F.A. Davis Company; 2013.
    1. Griffin TL, Pallan MJ, Clarke JL, Lancashire ER, Lyon A, Parry JM, Adab P, On behalf of the WAVES study trial investigators Process evaluation design in a cluster randomised controlled childhood obesity prevention trial: the WAVES study. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2014;11:112. doi: 10.1186/s12966-014-0112-1.
    1. Weaver RG, Beets MW, Hutto B, Saunders RP, Moore JB, Turner-McGrievy G, Huberty JL, Ward DS, Pate RR, Beighle A, Freedman D. Making healthy eating and physical activity policy practice: process evaluation of a group randomized controlled intervention in afterschool programs. Health Educ Res. 2015;30:849–65. doi: 10.1093/her/cyv052.
    1. Edwards MJ, May T, Kesten JM, Banfield K, Bird EL, Powell JE, Sebire SJ, Jago R. Lessons learnt from the Bristol Girls Dance Project cluster RCT: implications for designing and implementing after-school physical activity interventions. BMJ Open. 2016;6:e010036. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010036.
    1. Robinson TN, Matheson DM, Kraemer HC, Wilson DM, Obarzanek E, Thompson NS, Alhassan S, Spencer TR, Haydel KF, Fujimoto M, Varady A, Killen JD. A randomized controlled trial of culturally tailored dance and reducing screen time to prevent weight gain in low-income African American girls: Stanford GEMS. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2010;164:995–1004. doi: 10.1001/archpediatrics.2010.197.
    1. Deci EL. Effects of externally mediated awards on intrinsic motivation. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1971;18:105–15. doi: 10.1037/h0030644.
    1. Ryan RM, Deci EL. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: classic definitions and new directions. Contemp Educ Psychol. 2000;25:54–67. doi: 10.1006/ceps.1999.1020.
    1. Deci EL, Ryan RM. Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum; 1985.
    1. Robbins LB, Pender NJ, Kazanis AS. Barriers to physical activity perceived by adolescent girls. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2003;48:206–12. doi: 10.1016/S1526-9523(03)00054-0.
    1. Vermeesch AL, Ling J, Voskuil VR, Bakhoya M, Wesolek SM, Bourne KA, Pfeiffer KA, Robbins LB. Biological and sociocultural differences in perceived barriers to physical activity among fifth- to seventh-grade urban girls. Nurs Res. 2015;64:342–50. doi: 10.1097/NNR.0000000000000113.
    1. Vu M, Murrie D, Gonzalez V, Jobe JB. Listening to girl’s and boy’s talk about girls’ physical activity behaviors. Health Educ Behav. 2006;33:81–96. doi: 10.1177/1090198105282443.
    1. Evers WJ, Brouwers A, Tomic W. Burnout and self-efficacy: a study on teachers’ beliefs when implementing an innovative educational system in the Netherlands. Br J Educ Psychol. 2002;72:227–43. doi: 10.1348/000709902158865.
    1. Ross SW, Romer N, Horner RH. Teacher well-being and the implementation of schoolwide positive behavior interventions and supports. J Posit Behav Interven. 2012;14:118–28. doi: 10.1177/1098300711413820.
    1. Tsouloupas CN, Carson RL, Matthews RA. Personal and school cultural factors associated with the perceptions of teachers’ efficacy in handling student misbehavior. Psychol Schools. 2014;51:164–80. doi: 10.1002/pits.21739.
    1. Dinkel DM, Huberty J, Beets MW. Qualitative evaluation of GoGirlGo! Insights from staff on using a curriculum within after-school programs to improve physical activity. Health Promot Pract. 2015;16:184–92. doi: 10.1177/1524839914555571.
    1. Dusenbury L, Brannigan R, Falco M, Hansen WB. A review of research on fidelity of implementation: implications for drug abuse prevention in school settings. Health Educ Res. 2003;18:237–56. doi: 10.1093/her/18.2.237.
    1. de Meij JS, Chinapaw MJ, van Stralen MM, van der Wal MF, van Dieren L, van Mechelen W. Effectiveness of JUMP-in, a Dutch primary school-based community intervention aimed at the promotion of physical activity. Br J Sports Med. 2011;45:1052–7. doi: 10.1136/bjsm.2010.075531.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores e Colaboradores

Condições médicas

Intervenções de drogas

3
Se inscrever