Examining the role of parental self-regulation in family physical activity: a mixed-methods approach.

Physical activity (PA) is essential for good health. However, parents risk becoming less active because of the demands of parenting. This has consequences for children as parents are role models. The present study used a mixed-methods approach to explore parental self-regulation associated with PA. Data were collected from 36 parents with preschool-aged children. They were interviewed about their PA and their family's PA. Parents also completed PA and self-regulation questionnaires and wore an accelerometer for five days. Qualitative data were examined using an inductive approach to thematic analysis. It showed that parents felt that they had limited time for personal PA. Mothers' self-regulation was driven by an ethic of care and subjective norms, whereas fathers' self-regulation was driven by beliefs about the importance of autonomy. Nevertheless, both parents saw caring for their children as the main priority. Quantitative data were examined using multiple regression analyses. Results showed that different self-regulatory behaviours predicted the PA of mothers and fathers. Which predictors were significant depended on the type of activity and how it was measured. The findings warrant longitudinal research that would enable the effect of family dynamics on self-regulation associated with PA to be assessed

'Physical activity at home (PAAH)', evaluation of a group versus home based physical activity program in community dwelling middle aged adults: rationale and study design

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>It is well recognised that the adoption and longer term adherence to physical activity by adults to reduce the risk of chronic disease is a challenge. Interventions, such as group and home based physical activity programs, have been widely reported upon. However few studies have directly compared these interventions over the longer term to determine their adherence and effectiveness. Participant preference for home based or group interventions is important. Some evidence suggests that home based physical activity programs are preferred by middle aged adults and provide better long term physical activity adherence. Physiotherapists may also be useful in increasing physical activity adherence, with limited research on their impact.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>'Physical Activity at Home' is a 2 year pragmatic randomised control trial, with a non-randomised comparison to group exercise. Middle-aged adults not interested in, or unable to attend, a group exercise program will be targeted. Sedentary community dwelling 50-65 year olds with no serious medical conditions or functional impairments will be recruited via two mail outs using the Australian federal electoral roll. The first mail out will invite participants to a 6 month community group exercise program. The second mail out will be sent to those not interested in the group exercise program inviting them to take part in a home based intervention. Eligible home based participants will be randomised into a 6 month physiotherapy-led home based physical activity program or usual care. Outcome measures will be taken at baseline, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months. The primary outcome is physical activity adherence via exercise diaries. Secondary outcomes include the Active Australia Survey, accelerometry, aerobic capacity (step test), quality of life (SF-12v2), blood pressure, waist circumference, waist-to-hip ratio and body mass index. Costs will be recorded prospectively and qualitative data will be collected.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The planned 18 month follow-up post intervention will provide an indication of the effectiveness of the group and home based interventions in terms of adherence to physical activity, health benefits and cost. If the physiotherapy-led home based physical activity program is successful it could provide an alternative option for physical activity program delivery across a number of settings.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Register (ANZCTR): <a href="http://www.anzctr.org.au/ACTRN12611000890932.aspx">ACTRN12611000890932</a></p

Assessing the ‘active couch potato’ phenomenon in cardiac rehabilitation: rationale and study protocol

BACKGROUND: There is little evidence of whether or not those who have attended cardiac rehabilitation (CR) are meeting the physical activity guidelines recommended for secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. In healthy individuals, there is evidence, that even if individuals are meeting the physical activity guidelines, the harmfulness of too much sedentary behaviour remains (active couch potato (ACP) phenomenon). Currently, there appears to be no evidence of the ACP phenomenon in those attending CR. The aims of the study are to examine the level of physical activity and sedentary behaviour in those with coronary heart disease (CHD) who have attended CR, and to investigate the potential independent associations between these behaviours and cardio-metabolic health, health-related quality of life, exercise capacity, anxiety and depression. METHODS: A prospective cohort study will be conducted in Australia over 12-months. Baseline data from this study will contribute to an international, multi-centre cross-sectional study (Australia, New Zealand, United States of America, South Africa, Spain, and Portugal). Adults currently enrolled in a 6-week phase II cardiac rehabilitation program with stable CHD and receiving optimal medical treatment +/− revascularisation will be recruited. Outcome measures will be taken at baseline (commence CR), 6 weeks (complete CR), 6 and 12-months. Physical activity and sedentary behaviour will be measured using accelerometry and two questionnaires (Active Australia Survey, Past-Day Adults’ Sedentary Time questionnaire). Health outcomes will include body mass index, waist-to-hip ratio, lipid profile, blood glucose level, quality-of-life (MacNew), exercise capacity (6-min walk test), anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale). DISCUSSION: There has been limited investigation of the physical activity levels and sedentary behaviour of individuals with CHD attending CR. There are no studies assessing the relationship of these behaviours with health outcomes over the short and medium-term. As in healthy individuals, physical activity and sedentary behaviour may have independent effects on cardiovascular risk factors in people with CHD, which may contribute to recurrent cardiovascular events. If this is so, reducing sedentary behaviour may be a feasible first-line, additional and more achievable strategy to improve the health of those with CHD, alongside traditional recommendations to increase the time spent in moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): ACTRN1261500099557

Optimal primary care management of clinical osteoarthritis and joint pain in older people: a mixed-methods programme of systematic reviews, observational and qualitative studies, and randomised controlled trials

Background Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common long-term condition managed in UK general practice. However, care is suboptimal despite evidence that primary care and community-based interventions can reduce OA pain and disability. Objectives The overall aim was to improve primary care management of OA and the health of patients with OA. Four parallel linked workstreams aimed to (1) develop a health economic decision model for estimating the potential for cost-effective delivery of primary care OA interventions to improve population health, (2) develop and evaluate new health-care models for delivery of core treatments and support for self-management among primary care consulters with OA, and to investigate prioritisation and implementation of OA care among the public, patients, doctors, health-care professionals and NHS trusts, (3) determine the effectiveness of strategies to optimise specific components of core OA treatment using the example of exercise and (4) investigate the effect of interventions to tackle barriers to core OA treatment, using the example of comorbid anxiety and depression in persons with OA. Data sources The North Staffordshire Osteoarthritis Project database, held by Keele University, was the source of data for secondary analyses in workstream 1. Methods Workstream 1 used meta-analysis and synthesis of published evidence about effectiveness of primary care treatments, combined with secondary analysis of existing longitudinal population-based cohort data, to identify predictors of poor long-term outcome (prognostic factors) and design a health economic decision model to estimate cost-effectiveness of different hypothetical strategies for implementing optimal primary care for patients with OA. Workstream 2 used mixed methods to (1) develop and test a ‘model OA consultation’ for primary care health-care professionals (qualitative interviews, consensus, training and evaluation) and (2) evaluate the combined effect of a computerised ‘pop-up’ guideline for general practitioners (GPs) in the consultation and implementing the model OA consultation on practice and patient outcomes (parallel group intervention study). Workstream 3 developed and investigated in a randomised controlled trial (RCT) how to optimise the effect of exercise in persons with knee OA by tailoring it to the individual and improving adherence. Workstream 4 developed and investigated in a cluster RCT the extent to which screening patients for comorbid anxiety and depression can improve OA outcomes. Public and patient involvement included proposal development, project steering and analysis. An OA forum involved public, patient, health professional, social care and researcher representatives to debate the results and formulate proposals for wider implementation and dissemination. Results This programme provides evidence (1) that economic modelling can be used in OA to extrapolate findings of cost-effectiveness beyond the short-term outcomes of clinical trials, (2) about ways of implementing support for self-management and models of optimal primary care informed by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommendations, including the beneficial effects of training in a model OA consultation on GP behaviour and of pop-up screens in GP consultations on the quality of prescribing, (3) against adding enhanced interventions to current effective physiotherapy-led exercise for knee OA and (4) against screening for anxiety and depression in patients with musculoskeletal pain as an addition to current best practice for OA. Conclusions Implementation of evidence-based care for patients with OA is feasible in general practice and has an immediate impact on improving the quality of care delivered to patients. However, improved levels of quality of care, changes to current best practice physiotherapy and successful introduction of psychological screening, as achieved by this programme, did not substantially reduce patients’ pain and disability. This poses important challenges for clinical practice and OA research. Limitations The key limitation in this work is the lack of improvement in patient-reported pain and disability despite clear evidence of enhanced delivery of evidence-based care. Future work recommendations (1) New thinking and research is needed into the achievable and desirable long-term goals of care for people with OA, (2) continuing investigation into the resources needed to properly implement clinical guidelines for management of OA as a long-term condition, such as regular monitoring to maintain exercise and physical activity and (3) new research to identify subgroups of patients with OA as a basis for stratified primary care including (i) those with good prognosis who can self-manage with minimal investigation or specialist treatment, (ii) those who will respond to, and benefit from, specific interventions in primary care, such as physiotherapy-led exercise, and (iii) develop research into effective identification and treatment of clinically important anxiety and depression in patients with OA and into the effects of pain management on psychological outcomes in patients with OA. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN06984617, ISRCTN93634563 and ISRCTN40721988. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research Programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research Programme; Vol. 6, No. 4. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. </jats:sec