Feasibility study and pilot cluster-randomised controlled trial of the GoActive intervention aiming to promote physical activity among adolescents: outcomes and lessons learnt.
BMJ Open 2016 ; 6: e012335.
PubMed ID : 27836873
PMCID : PMC5129050
Assess the feasibility of implementing the GoActive intervention in secondary schools, to identify improvements, test study procedures, determine preliminary effectiveness to increase moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA), and inform power calculations to establish programme effectiveness.
Feasibility study (1 school) and pilot cluster-randomised controlled trial (CRCT; 2 intervention; 1 control school(s)).
460 participants (46.6% female; 13.2 (0.4) years old).
8-week intervention (2013) involved: classes choosing weekly activities encouraged by mentors (older adolescents) and in-class peer leaders. Students gain points for trying activities which are entered into an intramural competition.
Planned quantitative (questionnaire) and qualitative (focus groups) process evaluation addressed enjoyment, confidence, participation, suggested improvements. Outcomes were assessed at baseline and follow-up (week 8) in pilot CRCT and included accelerometer-assessed MVPA; adolescent-reported activity type, well-being, peer support, shyness, sociability. Analysis of covariance was used to assess preliminary effectiveness as change in MVPA adjusted for baseline.
All year 9 students in intervention schools were exposed to the intervention; over all schools 77% of eligible students were measured. 71% boys and 74% girls found GoActive 'fun'; 38% boys and 32% girls said it increased confidence, and 64% boys and 59% girls said they would continue with a GoActive activity. Suggested improvements included more mentorship; improved training; streamlined points recording. Pilot results indicated potential effectiveness ((adjusted mean difference (95% CI) p value; MVPA mins; 5.1 (1.1 to 9.2) p=0.014)) and suggest recruitment of 16 schools (2400 adolescents) for a full trial. Compared with control, intervention students reported greater peer support 0.5 (0.1 to 0.9) p=0.03, well-being 1.8 (0.1 to 3.4) p=0.04 but no difference in shyness/sociability. Participation in activity types approached significance (intervention group 2.3 (-0.2 to 4.7) p=0.07 more activity types).
Results suggest feasibility and indicate potential effectiveness of GoActive to increase MVPA and support a fully powered evaluation of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Process evaluation data were used to refine GoActive prior to a full trial.