Engaging Local Communities in Research PARC Study: Physical Activity - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Engaging Local Communities in Research

PARC Study: Physical Activity and the Rejuvenation of Connswater

Funded by National Prevention Research Initiative (G0802045)

www.niphrn.org.uk

DHSSPSNI, Health Survey NI, 2011/12

Why are people less active?

• People

– Biology – Psychology – Social/cultural factors Environment Reliance on cars Computers at work Electronic entertainment

Research

• Research answers a specific question and

tests specific hypotheses

• Research should be theoretically driven

and often uses randomisation in allocating interventions

• Research can be generalisable or

transferable to other groups outside those who participated

• Research can involve data collection,

treatments, interventions, samples or investigations additional to routine care

Evaluation

• Service evaluations define and judge existing

service delivery (where research may trial a new approach)

• Service evaluations provide practical

information such as costs, benefits, strengths and weaknesses of a service

• Service evaluations do not require ethical

approval

• Evaluation provides practical information to

help decide whether a development or service should be continued or not. Evaluation also involves making judgments about the value of what is being evaluated.” NHS Research & Development Forum, 2006

Ward et al; Social Science & Medicine 74 (2012) 297e304

Revised knowledge exchange framework.

Case Study - PARC

PARC Study: Physical Activity and the Rejuvenation of Connswater

Funded by National Prevention Research Initiative (G0802045)

Connswater Community Greenway

• To benefit 40,835+ people daily
• A 9km linear park, a wildlife corridor
• Connecting 124Ha of open space
• Approx. 30 new bridges
• Serving 26 schools and colleges
• 19kms of foot and cycle paths
• 5kms of clean rivers
• 6 Tourism & Heritage trails
• A new civic square

• 5 year evaluation of impact of Greenway
• Funded by NPRI phase III (c£1M)
• Developed in partnership with statutory, voluntary

and community organisations

PARC Study: Physical Activity and Rejuvenation in Connswater

Partners

Evaluation Questions

What is the impact of systems-based multi-sectoral interventions targeted at deprived populations on: (i) the proportion individuals meeting the recommended minimum level

• f physical activity

(ii) inequalities in physical activity participation (iii) social capital and capacity of communities for longer term gains (iv) cost –benefit of the whole systems approach to increasing levels of physical activity

Quasi-experimental Design

• Before and after household survey (n=1240)

– Comparison survey across N Ireland (n=4500)

• Network and social capital analysis
• Spatial data analysis
• Economic and behavioural economics analysis
• Process evaluation

– Programme take-up – Use of greenway – Traffic, crime etc

International Scientific and Policy Advisory Board Steering Group Project Team Built Environment Working Group Health Improvement Working Group Survey Working Group E-resource Working Group Economics Working Group Stakeholders Forum

Organisational Chart

http://blogs.plos.org/citizensci/

SOPARC: System for observing play and recreation in the community Records the number/type of users and the types of activity they are engaged in

What is involved?

• Standardised observation of

use of recreational space

• Two ‘scans’ per hour per site
• Systematically record data

Observations Feb 2010 & Aug 2011 for 7 consecutive days 1 hour observations made at:

• 7:30am (morning)
• 12:30pm (lunch)
• 3:30pm (afternoon)
• 6:30pm (evening)

• 22 community volunteers
• Reliability checked by 3 independent observers

Training of Observers

• Two ½ day training course

– Introduction to the purpose of SOPARC – How to conduct an observation – What to record and how to return information – Practical sessions – Exam & certificate

• Park users observed concurrently for 42 hours in 7 different

locations (=294 man hours)

• Collected information on 3514 park users (60% male)
• Equates to approx 62 park users per hour

Outputs

Structural Equation Model based on hypothesised pathways from socio-ecological model (Mplus)

Number Guidance/components Included (tick) 1 Inter-sectoral steering group for strategic planning Statutory sector representation Voluntary sector representation Community residents 2 Identify theoretical framework for intervention development 3 Establish knowledge sharing pathway within/ between organisations 4 Involve community Concept development Design (address specific needs) Intervention development Secure funding Share information Recruitment Delivery/ implementation 5 Engage volunteer support: ensure intervention information, design and resources are relevant to individuals in community 6 Train community volunteers/champions to provide relevant advice on health and physical activity 7 Establish an exit strategy 8 Foster ongoing community support: ensure feedback/ involvement in further planning/ support development of personal skills

Checklist for the design and development of physical activity interventions in socio-economically disadvantaged communities

Lay Summary

Events

• Press launch
• Points4Life seminar
• Physical activity and the built environment
• Walk to Work Week
• Fitness and the Heart

CCG Stakeholder Engagement

Photos by Avec Photography www.avecphotography.com

• CCG Stakeholder Forum held quarterly
• PARC staff have presented:

– Qualitative findings – Walkability – Household survey – Network analysis

Impact

Things that might help:

• A detailed job description
• Explicit research questions and methods
• Training
• Payment for their expertise

Spin-Offs

“Walk With Me Study” A feasibility study and pilot RCT of a peer- led walking programme to increase physical activity in inactive older adults

Funded by NIHR, summer 2014

Project Partners

To gather new knowledge on the feasibility and of a community delivered, peer- led physical activity intervention that promotes physical activity in older adults and explores its effects on health, mental wellbeing and social engagement

Aim

Project Plan

• 1. Intervention

Protocol

Identify BCTs from systematic review Participant interviews to determine feasibility and preferences (n=15) Development of logic model

Project Plan

• 2. Peer Mentors

Recruitment (n=6) Develop training programme

Project Plan

• 3. Test Feasibility
• f RCT

12 week peer-led walking programme

• n=60
• aged 60-70
• socio-economically

disadvantaged communities Measures (12 weeks & months):

• Physical activity
• Mental wellbeing
• Social engagement
• Quality of life
• Health and social care services resource use

Outcomes:

• Recruitment rate
• Attrition rate
• Acceptability (Focus groups)

PPI/Dissemination

Development

• Setting research agenda
• Reviewing proposal

Delivery

• Trial Steering Committee
• Input to design

Dissemination

• News sheets
• Lay summaries
• Community forums

Facilitated by

Thanks for Listening

Dr Mark Tully

UKCRC Centre of Excellence for Public Health (NI) Centre for Public Health Queen’s University Belfast m.tully@qub.ac.uk @marktully_qub