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 Environment – Biology Reliance on cars – Psychology Computers at work – Social/cultural factors Electronic entertainment
Research Evaluation • • Service evaluations define and judge existing Research answers a specific question and service delivery (where research may trial a tests specific hypotheses new approach) • Research should be theoretically driven • Service evaluations provide practical and often uses randomisation in allocating information such as costs, benefits, strengths interventions and weaknesses of a service • Research can be generalisable or • Service evaluations do not require ethical transferable to other groups outside those approval who participated • Evaluation provides practical information to help decide whether a development or service • Research can involve data collection, should be continued or not. Evaluation also treatments, interventions, samples or involves making judgments about the value of investigations additional to routine care what is being evaluated.” NHS Research & Development Forum, 2006
Revised knowledge exchange framework. Ward et al; Social Science & Medicine 74 (2012) 297e304
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
PARC Study: Physical Activity and Rejuvenation in Connswater • 5 year evaluation of impact of Greenway • Funded by NPRI phase III (c£1M) • Developed in partnership with statutory, voluntary and community organisations
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 of 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
Organisational Chart Built Environment Working Group Health Improvement Working Group Survey Steering Group Project Team International Working Group Scientific and Policy Advisory Board Stakeholders E-resource Forum Working Group Economics Working Group
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 S tructural E quation M odel based on hypothesised pathways from socio-ecological model (Mplus)
Checklist for the design and development of physical activity interventions in socio-economically disadvantaged communities 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 Foster ongoing community support: ensure feedback/ involvement in further planning/ support development of personal 8 skills
Lay Summary
Events • Press launch • Points4Life seminar • Physical activity and the built environment • Walk to Work Week • Fitness and the Heart
CCG Stakeholder Engagement • CCG Stakeholder Forum held quarterly • PARC staff have presented: – Qualitative findings – Walkability – Household survey – Network analysis Photos by Avec Photography www.avecphotography.com
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
Aim 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
Project Plan Identify BCTs from systematic review 1. Intervention Participant interviews to determine feasibility and preferences (n=15) Protocol Development of logic model
Project Plan Recruitment (n=6) 2. Peer Mentors Develop training programme
Project Plan 12 week peer-led walking programme -n=60 -aged 60-70 -socio-economically disadvantaged communities Measures (12 weeks & months): -Physical activity 3. Test Feasibility -Mental wellbeing of RCT -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 Facilitated by Delivery • Trial Steering Committee • Input to design Dissemination • News sheets • Lay summaries • Community forums
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
Recommend
More recommend
