Exercise referral schemes enhanced by self-management strategies to reduce sedentary behaviour and increase physical activity among community-dwelling older adults from four European countries: protocol for the process evaluation of the SITLESS randomised controlled trial

Laura Coll-Planas, Sergi Blancafort Alias, Mark Tully, Paolo Caserotti, Maria Giné-Garriga, Nicole Blackburn, Mathias Skjødt, Katharina Wirth, Manuela Deidda, Emma McIntosh, Dietrich Rothenbacher, Rodrigo Gallardo Rodríguez, Javier Jerez-Roig, Oriol Sansano-Nadal, Marta Santiago, Jason Wilson, Míriam Guerra-Balic, Carme Martín-Borràs, Denise Gonzalez, Guillaume Lefebvre, Michael Denkinger, Frank Kee, Antoni Salvà Casanovas, Marta Roqué I Figuls, SITLESS group, Laura Coll-Planas, Sergi Blancafort Alias, Mark Tully, Paolo Caserotti, Maria Giné-Garriga, Nicole Blackburn, Mathias Skjødt, Katharina Wirth, Manuela Deidda, Emma McIntosh, Dietrich Rothenbacher, Rodrigo Gallardo Rodríguez, Javier Jerez-Roig, Oriol Sansano-Nadal, Marta Santiago, Jason Wilson, Míriam Guerra-Balic, Carme Martín-Borràs, Denise Gonzalez, Guillaume Lefebvre, Michael Denkinger, Frank Kee, Antoni Salvà Casanovas, Marta Roqué I Figuls, SITLESS group

Abstract

Introduction: SITLESS is a randomised controlled trial determining whether exercise referral schemes can be enhanced by self-management strategies to reduce sedentary behaviour and increase physical activity in the long term, in community-dwelling older citizens. The intervention is complex and requires a process evaluation to understand how implementation, causal mechanisms and context shape outcomes. The specific aims are to assess fidelity and reach of the implementation, understand the contextual aspects of each intervention site, evaluate the mechanisms of impact, and explore perceived effects.

Methods and analysis: Following the Medical Research Council guidance on complex interventions, a combination of qualitative and quantitative procedures is applied, including observational checklists and attendance registries, standardised scales (ie, Marcus's Self-Efficacy Questionnaire, Physical Activity Self-Regulation Scale and the Lubben Social Network Scale) at baseline, postintervention and follow-up assessments, semistructured questionnaires gathering contextual characteristics, and participant observations of the sessions. Semistructured interviews and focus groups with the participants and trainers are conducted at postintervention and during the follow-up to explore their experiences. Outcomes from the standardised scales are analysed as moderators within the impact evaluation. Descriptive results on context and perceived effects complement results on impact. The qualitative and quantitative findings will help to refine the logic model to finally support the interpretation of the results on the effectiveness of the intervention.

Ethics and dissemination: The study design was approved by the respective Ethical Committee of Ramon Llull University, Southern Denmark, Northern Ireland and Ulm University. Participation is voluntary, and all participants are asked to sign informed consent before starting the study. A dissemination plan operationalises how to achieve a social impact by reaching academic and non-academic stakeholders. A data management plan describes the specific data sets and regulates its deposition and curation. All publications will be open access.

Trial registration number: NCT02629666; Pre-results.

Keywords: epidemiology; geriatric medicine; public health.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The logic model of the SITLESS intervention. BMI, Body Mass Index; HRQoL, Health-related Quality of Life; MVPA, Moderate and Vigorous Physical Activity; SMART, Specific Measurable Achievable Relevant Time-Oriented.
Figure 2
Figure 2
The process evaluation framework for the SITLESS trial. **IDEA refers to the IDEA (Identify Develop Evaluate Analyse) problem solving framework. ERS, exercise referral schemes; PA, physical activity; SB, sedentary behaviour; SMS, self-management strategies.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Specific aims, procedures and outcomes of the process evaluation and their triangulation with impact evaluation outcomes. ERS, exercise referral schemes; SMS, self-management strategies.

References

    1. Berwick DM. The science of improvement. JAMA 2008;299:1182–4. 10.1001/jama.299.10.1182
    1. Campbell NC, Murray E, Darbyshire J, et al. . Designing and evaluating complex interventions to improve health care. BMJ 2007;334:455–9. 10.1136/
    1. Moore G, Audrey S, Barker M, et al. . Process evaluation of complex interventions. UK Med. Res. Counc. Guid. Prep 2014;19-45:64–75 .
    1. Moore GF, Audrey S, Barker M, et al. . Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ 2015;350:h1258–7. 10.1136/bmj.h1258
    1. Pfadenhauer LM, Gerhardus A, Mozygemba K, et al. . Making sense of complexity in context and implementation: the Context and Implementation of Complex Interventions (CICI) framework. Implement Sci 2017;12:1–17. 10.1186/s13012-017-0552-5
    1. Lee IM, Shiroma EJ, Lobelo F, et al. . Effect of physical inactivity on major non-communicable diseases worldwide: an analysis of burden of disease and life expectancy. Lancet 2012;380:219–29. 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61031-9
    1. WHO Global recommendations on physical activity for health. WHO Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data Geneva, 2010:60.
    1. Ding D, Lawson KD, Kolbe-Alexander TL, et al. . The economic burden of physical inactivity: a global analysis of major non-communicable diseases. Lancet 2016;388:1311–24. 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30383-X
    1. Owen N, Sparling PB, Healy GN, et al. . Sedentary behavior: emerging evidence for a new health risk. Mayo Clin Proc 2010;85:1138–41. 10.4065/mcp.2010.0444
    1. Koster A, Caserotti P, Patel KV, et al. . Association of sedentary time with mortality independent of moderate to vigorous physical activity. PLoS One 2012;7:e37696 10.1371/journal.pone.0037696
    1. Harvey JA, Chastin SF, Skelton DA. Prevalence of sedentary behavior in older adults: a systematic review. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2013;10:6645–61. 10.3390/ijerph10126645
    1. Ekelund U, Steene-Johannessen J, Brown WJ, et al. . Does physical activity attenuate, or even eliminate, the detrimental association of sitting time with mortality? A harmonised meta-analysis of data from more than 1 million men and women. Lancet 2016;388:1302–10. 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30370-1
    1. Giné-Garriga M, Coll-Planas L, Guerra M, et al. . The SITLESS project: exercise referral schemes enhanced by self-management strategies to battle sedentary behaviour in older adults: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials 2017;18:221 10.1186/s13063-017-1956-x
    1. Deidda M, Coll-Planas L, Giné-Garriga M, et al. . Cost-effectiveness of exercise referral schemes enhanced by self-management strategies to battle sedentary behaviour in older adults: protocol for an economic evaluation alongside the SITLESS three-armed pragmatic randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open 2018;8:e022266 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-022266
    1. Lewin S, Hendry M, Chandler J, et al. . Assessing the complexity of interventions within systematic reviews: development, content and use of a new tool (iCAT_SR). BMC Med Res Methodol 2017;17:1–13. 10.1186/s12874-017-0349-x
    1. Bardone E, Lind M. Towards a phronetic space for responsible research (and innovation). Life Sci. Soc. Policy 2016;12:5.
    1. Marcus BH, Selby VC, Niaura RS, et al. . Self-efficacy and the stages of exercise behavior change. Res Q Exerc Sport 1992;63:60–6. 10.1080/02701367.1992.10607557
    1. Umstattd MR, Motl R, Wilcox S, et al. . Measuring physical activity self-regulation strategies in older adults. J Phys Act Health 2009;6(Suppl 1):S105–S112. 10.1123/jpah.6.s1.s105
    1. Lubben JE. Assessing social networks among elderly populations. Fam Community Health 1988;11:42–52. 10.1097/00003727-198811000-00008
    1. Garratt AM, Løchting I, Smedslund G, et al. . Measurement properties of instruments assessing self-efficacy in patients with rheumatic diseases. Rheumatology 2014;53:1161–71. 10.1093/rheumatology/ket374
    1. Mendoza-Vasconez AS, Marquez B, Benitez TJ, et al. . Psychometrics of the self-efficacy for physical activity scale among a Latina women sample. BMC Public Health 2018;18:1097 10.1186/s12889-018-5998-0
    1. Lubben J, Blozik E, Gillmann G, et al. . Performance of an abbreviated version of the Lubben Social Network Scale among three European community-dwelling older adult populations. Gerontologist 2006;46:503–13. 10.1093/geront/46.4.503
    1. Gale NK, Heath G, Cameron E, et al. . Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Med Res Methodol 2013;13:117 10.1186/1471-2288-13-117
    1. Marcus B, Forsyth L. Physical Activity Intervention Series Motivating people to be physically active. 2 Edn: Human Kinetics, 2009.

Source: PubMed

3
Prenumerera