Practice educators' perceptions of interprofessional education and issues surrounding its implementation in the clinical placement setting

Background: IPE occurs when two or more professions learn with, from and about each other to improve collaboration and care (CAIPE 2002) It is being increasingly considered as part of undergraduate health professional training (Hammick et al 2007). Much of the existing literature centres on IPE post-registration, in academic settings and on students' perceptions of IPE. To date, there has not been a study on Irish practice educators' perceptions of IPE. Objectives: To investigate practice educators' views in regards to implementing IPE in a placement setting and discover what they perceive to be barriers and facilitators to its implementation. Methods: Four focus groups were conducted including sixteen practice educators from physiotherapy, occupational therapy and speech and language therapy working in various settings. Groups were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data was coded and a thematic analysis performed (Krueger and Casey 2000). Findings: Three main themes emerged: (i) perceptions, (ii) issues surrounding planning and resources available and (iii) outcomes. Participants had good awareness and positive perceptions of IPE. They felt that negative attitudes of some health professionals could be a barrier. Planning issues such as placement timing, student assessment, caseload, local and university support were frequently mentioned as things requiring consideration for successful IPE. Improved teamwork, knowledge and patient care were recognised as the main outcomes of IPE. Conclusions: IPE has potential benefits but requires planning and coordination. Findings may be useful for organising clinical placements. Further research is required to investigate if these can be replicated on larger scales

Additional file 1: of Using computer, mobile and wearable technology enhanced interventions to reduce sedentary behaviour: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PRISMA checklist (DOC 62 kb

Additional file 1: Table S1. of Systematic literature review of determinants of sedentary behaviour in older adults: a DEDIPAC study

Systematic search terms. (DOC 41 kb

Additional file 1: of A systematic review of determinants of sedentary behaviour in youth: a DEDIPAC-study

Details of search strategy: Four main elements of the search and complete list of search terms. (DOCX 15 kb

Results from Ireland North and South’s 2022 report card on physical activity for children and adolescents

Background: The Ireland North and South Report Card on Physical Activity (PA) for Children and Adolescents aims to monitor progress in PA participation across a range of internationally established indicators.Methods: Data were collated for 11 indicators and graded following the harmonised Active Healthy Kids Global Alliance report card process. Six representative studies (sample size range n = 898 to n = 15,557) were primarily used in the grading, with many indicators supplemented with additional studies and reports. Data collected since the implementation of COVID-19 public health measures in March 2020 were excluded.Results: Grades were awarded as follows: ‘Overall physical activity’, C-; ‘Organised Sport and Physical Activity’, C; ‘Active Play’, INC; ‘Sedentary Behaviours’, C-; ‘Physical Fitness’, INC; ‘Family and Peers’, D+; ‘School’, C-; ‘Physical Education’, D; ‘Community and Environment’, B+ and ‘Government’, B. Separate grades were awarded for disability as follows; ‘Overall physical activity’, F; ‘Organised Sport and Physical Activity’, D; ‘Sedentary Behaviours’, C-; ‘Family and Peers’, C; ‘School’, C- and ‘Government’, B. ‘Active Play’, ‘Physical Fitness’, ‘Physical Education’ and ‘Community and Environment’ were all graded INC for disability. Since the last report card in 2016, four grades remained the same, three increased (‘Overall physical activity’, ‘School’ and ‘Physical Education’) and two (‘Family and Peers,’ and ‘Government’) were awarded grades for the first time. Conclusion: Grades specific to children and adolescents with disability were generally lower for each indicator. While small improvements have been shown across a few indicators, PA levels remain low across many indicators for children and adolescents.</p

Children’s Sport Participation and Physical Activity Study 2022

The Children’s Sport Participation and Physical Activity Study 2022 (CSPPA 2022) is an All-Island population research project that follows on from CSPPA in 2018 and 2010. A total of 8,881 school children and young people aged 10 to 19 on the island of Ireland were asked to report on various aspects related to sport participation and physical activity. CSPPA was a multi-centre study, undertaken by the University of Limerick, Dublin City University, University College Cork, and Ulster University. It was funded by Sport Ireland, Healthy Ireland and Sport Northern Ireland, with additional support from the Departments of Health and Education in the Republic of Ireland.</p

The Physical Activity Messaging Framework (PAMF) and Checklist (PAMC): International consensus statement and user guide

Effective physical activity messaging plays an important role in the pathway towards changing physical activity behaviour at a population level. The Physical Activity Messaging Framework (PAMF) and Checklist (PAMC) are outputs from a recent modified Delphi study. This sought consensus from an international expert panel on how to aid the creation and evaluation of physical activity messages. In this paper, we (1) present an overview of the various concepts within the PAMF and PAMC, (2) discuss in detail how the PAMF and PAMC can be used to create physical activity messages, plan evaluation of messages, and aid understanding and categorisation of existing messages, and (3) highlight areas for future development and research. If adopted, we propose that the PAMF and PAMC could improve physical activity messaging practice by encouraging evidence-based and target population-focused messages with clearly stated aims and consideration of potential working pathways. They could also enhance the physical activity messaging research base by harmonising key messaging terminologies, improving quality of reporting, and aiding collation and synthesis of the evidence