Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Jun 14;9(6):e027073.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-027073.

Exercise referral schemes enhanced by self-management strategies to reduce sedentary behaviour and increase physical activity among community-dwelling older adults from four European countries: protocol for the process evaluation of the SITLESS randomised controlled trial

Affiliations

Exercise referral schemes enhanced by self-management strategies to reduce sedentary behaviour and increase physical activity among community-dwelling older adults from four European countries: protocol for the process evaluation of the SITLESS randomised controlled trial

Laura Coll-Planas et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Introduction: SITLESS is a randomised controlled trial determining whether exercise referral schemes can be enhanced by self-management strategies to reduce sedentary behaviour and increase physical activity in the long term, in community-dwelling older citizens. The intervention is complex and requires a process evaluation to understand how implementation, causal mechanisms and context shape outcomes. The specific aims are to assess fidelity and reach of the implementation, understand the contextual aspects of each intervention site, evaluate the mechanisms of impact, and explore perceived effects.

Methods and analysis: Following the Medical Research Council guidance on complex interventions, a combination of qualitative and quantitative procedures is applied, including observational checklists and attendance registries, standardised scales (ie, Marcus's Self-Efficacy Questionnaire, Physical Activity Self-Regulation Scale and the Lubben Social Network Scale) at baseline, postintervention and follow-up assessments, semistructured questionnaires gathering contextual characteristics, and participant observations of the sessions. Semistructured interviews and focus groups with the participants and trainers are conducted at postintervention and during the follow-up to explore their experiences. Outcomes from the standardised scales are analysed as moderators within the impact evaluation. Descriptive results on context and perceived effects complement results on impact. The qualitative and quantitative findings will help to refine the logic model to finally support the interpretation of the results on the effectiveness of the intervention.

Ethics and dissemination: The study design was approved by the respective Ethical Committee of Ramon Llull University, Southern Denmark, Northern Ireland and Ulm University. Participation is voluntary, and all participants are asked to sign informed consent before starting the study. A dissemination plan operationalises how to achieve a social impact by reaching academic and non-academic stakeholders. A data management plan describes the specific data sets and regulates its deposition and curation. All publications will be open access.

Trial registration number: NCT02629666; Pre-results.

Keywords: epidemiology; geriatric medicine; public health.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The logic model of the SITLESS intervention. BMI, Body Mass Index; HRQoL, Health-related Quality of Life; MVPA, Moderate and Vigorous Physical Activity; SMART, Specific Measurable Achievable Relevant Time-Oriented.
Figure 2
Figure 2
The process evaluation framework for the SITLESS trial. **IDEA refers to the IDEA (Identify Develop Evaluate Analyse) problem solving framework. ERS, exercise referral schemes; PA, physical activity; SB, sedentary behaviour; SMS, self-management strategies.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Specific aims, procedures and outcomes of the process evaluation and their triangulation with impact evaluation outcomes. ERS, exercise referral schemes; SMS, self-management strategies.

References

    1. Berwick DM. The science of improvement. JAMA 2008;299:1182–4. 10.1001/jama.299.10.1182 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Campbell NC, Murray E, Darbyshire J, et al. . Designing and evaluating complex interventions to improve health care. BMJ 2007;334:455–9. 10.1136/bmj.39108.379965.BE - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Moore G, Audrey S, Barker M, et al. . Process evaluation of complex interventions. UK Med. Res. Counc. Guid. Prep 2014;19-45:64–75 http://www.populationhealthsciences.org/MRC-PHSRN-Process-evaluation-gui....
    1. Moore GF, Audrey S, Barker M, et al. . Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ 2015;350:h1258–7. 10.1136/bmj.h1258 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Pfadenhauer LM, Gerhardus A, Mozygemba K, et al. . Making sense of complexity in context and implementation: the Context and Implementation of Complex Interventions (CICI) framework. Implement Sci 2017;12:1–17. 10.1186/s13012-017-0552-5 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data