Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Tahir Foundation Building, Block MD1, 12 Science Drive 2, #09-01V, Singapore, 117549, Singapore.
Centre for Urban Greenery & Ecology, National Parks Board Singapore, 1E Cluny Rd, Singapore Botanic Gardens, Singapore, 259569, Singapore.
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2020 Mar 17;17(1):42. doi: 10.1186/s12966-020-00941-8.
Programs promoting population health through physical activity (PA) and exposure to nature are popular, but few have been evaluated in randomized-controlled trials (RCTs).
To investigate the effectiveness of a park prescription intervention (PPI) for improving total moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA), other PA related behaviors, quality of life (QoL) and cardio-metabolic health among adults.
Healthy individuals aged 40 to 65 years were recruited through community health screenings and randomly assigned to 1) PPI: face-to-face Park Prescription + invitation to weekly exercise sessions in parks, or 2) control: standard PA materials. After the six-month intervention, participants completed accelerometer assessments, questionnaires on health behaviors and QoL, and health screenings. Independent sample t-tests were used to compare outcomes between groups, with secondary analysis adjusted for co-variates via multiple linear regression. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Eighty participants were allocated to each group. Participants with mean age of 51.1 (Standard Deviation: 6.3) years were predominantly female (79%) and of Chinese ethnicity (81%). Participation in the group exercise started at 48% and declined to 24% by week 26. At six-months, 145 (91%) participants attended health screenings for outcome measure collection, and 126 (79%) provided valid accelerometer data. Time spent in MVPA favored the PPI group but this difference was not statistically significant (4.4 (- 43.8, 52.7) minutes/week; when removing 2 extreme outliers 26.8 (- 9.7, 63.4) minutes/week). Time spent in parks (147.5 (2.1, 292.9) minutes/month), PA in parks (192.5 (59.5, 325.5) minutes/month), and recreational PA (48.7 (1.4, 96.0) minutes/week) were significantly greater in the PPI group. PPI also significantly improved psychological QoL (4.0 (0.0, 8.0).
PPI improved park use, PA in parks, recreational PA, and psychological QoL but not total MVPA. Future RCTs' are warranted to investigate PPI in different target populations and to provide further evidence for improvements in health outcomes.
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02615392, 26 November 2015.
通过身体活动（PA）和接触自然来促进人口健康的项目很受欢迎，但很少有项目经过随机对照试验（RCT）的评估。
研究公园处方干预（PPI）对改善成年人的总中等至剧烈体力活动（MVPA）、其他与体力活动相关的行为、生活质量（QoL）和心血管代谢健康的有效性。
通过社区健康筛查招募年龄在 40 至 65 岁之间的健康个体，并将其随机分配到 1）PPI：面对面的公园处方+邀请参加公园每周的锻炼课程，或 2）对照组：标准的 PA 材料。经过六个月的干预后，参与者完成了加速度计评估、健康行为和生活质量问卷以及健康筛查。使用独立样本 t 检验比较组间结果，通过多元线性回归对次要分析进行协变量调整。p 值<0.05 被认为具有统计学意义。
每组分配了 80 名参与者。参与者的平均年龄为 51.1（标准差：6.3）岁，主要为女性（79%）和华裔（81%）。参加小组锻炼的人数从 48%开始下降，到第 26 周下降到 24%。在六个月时，有 145 名（91%）参与者参加了健康筛查以进行结果测量收集，有 126 名（79%）提供了有效的加速度计数据。MVPA 时间有利于 PPI 组，但这一差异没有统计学意义（4.4（-43.8，52.7）分钟/周；当去除 2 个极端异常值时为 26.8（-9.7，63.4）分钟/周）。在 PPI 组中，公园使用时间（147.5（2.1，292.9）分钟/月）、公园内 PA（192.5（59.5，325.5）分钟/月）和娱乐性 PA（48.7（1.4，96.0）分钟/周）显著增加。PPI 还显著改善了心理 QoL（4.0（0.0，8.0）。
PPI 改善了公园使用、公园内 PA、娱乐性 PA 和心理 QoL，但对总 MVPA 没有影响。未来的 RCT 有必要在不同的目标人群中研究 PPI，并为改善健康结果提供进一步的证据。
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02615392，2015 年 11 月 26 日。
Zotero 插件