College of Medicine, Swansea University, Swansea, UK.
Department of Sport and Physical Activity, Edgehill University, Ormskirk, UK.
BMJ Open. 2019 May 10;9(5):e025618. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025618.
This paper explores what aspects of a multicomponent intervention were deemed strengths and weaknesses by teenagers and the local council when promoting physical activity to young people.
Qualitative findings at 12 months from a mixed method randomised control trial.
Active Children Through Incentive Vouchers-Evaluation (ACTIVE) gave teenagers £20 of activity enabling vouchers every month for a year. Peer mentors were also trained and a support worker worked with teenagers to improve knowledge of what was available. Semistructured focus groups took place at 12 months to assess strengths and weaknesses of the intervention. Eight focus groups (n=64 participants) took place with teenagers and one additional focus group was dedicated to the local council's sport development team (n=8 participants). Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data.
Teenagers used the vouchers on three main activities: trampolining, laser tag or the water park. These appeal to both genders, are social, fun and require no prior skill or training. Choice and financial support for teenagers in deprived areas was considered a strength by teenagers and the local council. Teenagers did not engage with a trained peer mentor but the support worker was considered helpful.
The ACTIVE Project's delivery had both strengths and weakness that could be used to underpin future physical activity promotion. Future interventions should focus on improving access to low cost, fun, unstructured and social activities rather than structured organised exercise/sport. The lessons learnt from this project can help bridge the gap between what is promoted to teenagers and what they actually want from activity provision.
ISRCTN75594310.
本文探讨了在向年轻人推广体育活动时,多组分干预措施的哪些方面被青少年和地方议会认为是优势和劣势。
混合方法随机对照试验 12 个月的定性发现。
Active Children Through Incentive Vouchers-Evaluation(ACTIVE)为青少年每月提供 20 英镑的活动代金券,为期一年。还培训了同伴导师,并安排了一名支持工作人员与青少年合作,以提高他们对现有活动的了解。在 12 个月时进行半结构式焦点小组讨论,以评估干预措施的优势和劣势。进行了 8 个焦点小组(n=64 名参与者),涉及青少年,另外一个焦点小组专门讨论地方议会的体育发展团队(n=8 名参与者)。使用主题分析对数据进行分析。
青少年主要使用代金券进行三种活动:蹦床、激光标签或水上公园。这些活动对男女都有吸引力,具有社交性、趣味性,且无需事先掌握技能或接受培训。青少年和地方议会认为,为贫困地区的青少年提供选择和财务支持是优势。青少年没有与受过培训的同伴导师互动,但支持工作人员被认为是有帮助的。
ACTIVE 项目的实施既有优势也有劣势,可以为未来的体育活动推广提供依据。未来的干预措施应侧重于改善获取低成本、有趣、无组织和社交活动的途径,而不是结构化的组织运动。从该项目中吸取的经验教训可以帮助弥合向青少年宣传的内容与他们实际从活动提供中获得的内容之间的差距。
ISRCTN75594310。