The effect of the UP4FUN pilot intervention on objectively measured sedentary time and physical activity in 10–12 year old children in Belgium: the ENERGY-project

BMC Public Health

Ilse De Bourdeaudhuij⁵  Greet Cardon⁵  Johannes Brug²  Froydis N Vik⁴  Nanna Lien¹  Lea Maes³  Wendy Van Lippevelde³  Elling Bere⁴  Maïte Verloigne⁵ 

[1] Department of Nutrition, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway;Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics and the EMGO Institute for Health & Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands;Department of Public Health, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium;Department of Public Health, Sport and Nutrition, University of Agder, Agder, Norway;Department of Movement and Sport Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium

关键词: Accelerometer;    Physical activity;    Children;    Randomized controlled trial;    Intervention;    Sedentary behaviour;   

Others  :  1163058
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2458-12-805

 received in 2012-06-04, accepted in 2012-09-13,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Bakckground

The first aim was to examine the effect of the UP4FUN pilot intervention on children’s total sedentary time. The second aim was to investigate if the intervention had an effect on children’s physical activity (PA) level. Finally, we aimed to investigate demographic differences (i.e. age, gender, ethnicity, living status and having siblings) between children in the intervention group who improved in sedentary time and PA at post-test and children in the intervention group who worsened in sedentary time and PA at post-test.

Methods

The six weeks UP4FUN intervention was tested in a randomized controlled trial with pre-test post-test design with five intervention and five control schools in Belgium and included children of the 5^th and 6^th grade. The children wore accelerometers for seven days at pre- and post-test. Analyses included children with valid accelerometer data for at least two weekdays with minimum 10h-wearing time and one weekend day with 8h-wearing time.

Result

Final analyses included 372 children (60% girls, mean age = 10.9 ± 0.7 years). There were no significant differences in the change in sedentary time or light PA between intervention and control schools for the total sample or for the subgroup analyses by gender. However, children (specifically girls) in the intervention group had a higher decrease in moderate-to-vigorous PA than children in the control group. In the intervention group, children who lived with both parents and children with one or more siblings were less likely to reduce sedentary time after exposure to the intervention. Older children, girls and children who lived with both parents were less likely to increase light PA after the intervention.

Conclusion

The UP4FUN intervention did not result in an effect on children’s sedentary time. Based on the high amounts of accelerometer-derived sedentary time in this age group, more efforts are needed to develop strategies to reduce children’s sedentary time.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Verloigne et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Tremblay MS, Leblanc AG, Kho ME, Saunders TJ, Larouche R, Colley RC, Goldfield G, Gorber SC: Systematic review of sedentary behaviour and health indicators in school-aged children and youth. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2011, 8:98. BioMed Central Full Text
• [2]Chinapaw MJM, Proper KI, Brug J, Van Mechelen W, Singh AS: Relationship between young peoples' sedentary behaviour and biomedical health indicators: a systematic review of prospective studies. Obes Rev 2011, 12:e621-e632.
• [3]Biddle SJH, O’Connell S, Braithwaite RE: Sedentary behaviour interventions in young people: a meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med 2011, 45:937.
• [4]Leung MM, Agaronov A, Grytsenko K, Yeh M: Intervening to reduce sedentary behaviors and childhood obesity among school-age youth: a systematic review of randomized trials. J Obes 2012. in press
• [5]Robinson TN: Reducing children’s television viewing to prevent obesity: a randomized controlled trial. J Am Med Assoc 1999, 282:1561-1567.
• [6]Robinson TN, Borzekowski DLG: Effects of the SMART classroom curriculum to reduce child and family screen time. J Comm 2006, 56:147-180.
• [7]Escobar-Chaves SL, Markham CM, Addy RC, Greisinger A, Murray NG, Brehm B: The Fun Families study: intervention to reduce children’s TV viewing. Obes 2010, 18:S99-S101.
• [8]Biddle SJH, Gorely T, Marshall SJ: Is television viewing a suitable marker of sedentary behavior in young people? Ann Behav Med 2009, 38:147-153.
• [9]Ni Mhurchu C, Roberts V, Maddison R, Dorey E, Jiang Y, Jull A, Tin Tin S: Effect of electronic time monitors on children’s television watching: Pilot trial of a home-based intervention. Prev Med 2009, 49:413-417.
• [10]Brug J, te Velde SJ, Chinapaw MJM, Bere E, De Bourdeaudhuij I, Moore H, Maes L, Jensen J, Manios Y, Lien N, Klepp KI, Lobstein T, Martens M, Salmon J, Singh AS: Evidence-based development of school-based and family-involved prevention of overweight across Europe: the ENERGY-project’s design and conceptual framework. BMC Public Health 2010, 10:276. BioMed Central Full Text
• [11]Brown T, Summerbell C: Systematic review of school-based interventions that focus on changing dietary intake and physical activity levels to prevent childhood obesity: an update to the obesity guidance produced by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Obes Rev 2009, 10:110-141.
• [12]Van Lippevelde W, Verloigne M, De Bourdeaudhuij I, Brug J, Bjelland M, Lien N, Maes L: Does parental involvement make a difference in school-based nutrition and physical activity interventions? A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Int J Public Healthin press
• [13]Salmon J, Dunstan D, Owen N: Should we be concerned about children spending extended periods of time in sedentary pursuits even among the highly active? Int J Pediatr Obes 2008, 3:66-68.
• [14]Brug J, Oenema A, Ferreira I: Theory, evidence and Intervention Mapping to improve behavior nutrition and physical activity interventions. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2005, 2:2. BioMed Central Full Text
• [15]Kremers SPJ, de Bruijn GJ, Visscher TLS, van Mechelen W, de Vries NK, Brug J: Environmental influences on energy balance-related behaviors: a dual-process view. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2006, 3:9. BioMed Central Full Text
• [16]Michie S, Johnston M, Francis J, Hardeman W, Eccles M: From theory to intervention: mapping theoretically derived behavioural determinants to behaviour change techniques. Appl Psychol 2008, 57:660-680.
• [17]Reilly RR, Penpraze V, Hislop J, Davies G, Grant S, Paton JY: Objective measurement of physical activity and sedentary behaviour: review with new data. Arch Dis Child 2008, 93:614-619.
• [18]Sasaki JE, John D, Freedson P: Validation and comparison of ActiGraph activity monitors. J Sci Med Sport 2011, 14:411-416.
• [19]The Actilife-5 User Manual: Prepared by ActiGraph R&D and Software Departments. http://support.theactigraph.com/downloads/ webcite
• [20]MeterPlus version 4.2 software from Santech, Inc. http://www.meterplussoftware.com webcite
• [21]Mattocks C, Ness A, Leary S, Tilling K, Blair SN, Shield J, Deere K, Saunders J, Kirkby J, Smith GD, Wells J, Wareham N, Reilly J, Riddoch C: Use of accelerometers in a large field-based study of children: protocols, design issues, and effects on precision. J Phys Act Health 2008, 5:S98-S111.
• [22]Treuth MS, Schmitz K, Catellier DJ, McMurray RG, Murray DM, Almeida MJ, Going S, Norman JE, Pate R: Defining accelerometer thresholds for activity intensities in adolescent girls. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2004, 36:1259-1266.
• [23]Cohen J: Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. 2nd edition. Erlbaum, Hillsdale: NJ; 1988.
• [24]Bringolf-Isler B, Grize L, Mäder U, Ruch N, Sennhauser FH, Braun-Fahrländer C: Assessment of intensity, prevalence and duration of everyday activities in Swiss school children: a cross-sectional analysis of accelerometer and diary data. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2009, 6:50. BioMed Central Full Text
• [25]Harrison F, Jones AP, Bentham G, van Sluijs EMF, Cassidy A, Griffin S: The impact of rainfall and school break time policies on physical activity in 9–10 year old British children: a repeated measures study. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2011, 8:47. BioMed Central Full Text
• [26]Naylor P-J, McKay HA: Prevention in the first place: schools a setting for action on physical inactivity. Br J Sports Med 2009, 43:10-13.
• [27]Wahi G, Parkin PC, Beyene J, Uleryk EM, Birken CS: Effectiveness of interventions aimed at reducing screen time in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2011, 165:979-986.
• [28]Gebremariam MK, Totland TH, Andersen LF, Bergh IH, Bjelland M, Grydeland M, Ommundsen Y, Lien N: Stability and change in screen-based sedentary behaviours and associated factors among Norwegian children in the transition between childhood and adolescence. BMC Public Health 2012, 12:104. BioMed Central Full Text