No abstract

BackgroundGiven the increase in overweight and obesity prevalence in adolescents in the last decade, effective prevention strategies for these conditions in adolescents are urgently needed. The PRALIMAP (Promotion de l'ALImentation et de l'Activité Physique) trial aims to evaluate the effectiveness for these conditions of 3 health promotion strategies -- educational, screening and environmental -- applied singly or in combination in high schools over a 2-year intervention period.MethodsPRALIMAP is a stratified 2 × 2 × 2 factorial cluster randomised controlled trial including 24 state high schools in Lorraine, northeastern France, in 2 waves: 8 schools in 2006 (wave 1) and 16 in 2007 (wave 2). Students entering the selected high schools in the 4 academic years from 2006 to 2009 are eligible for data collection. Interventional strategies are organized over 2 academic years. The follow-up consists of 3 visits: at the entry of grade 10 (T0), grade 11 (T1) and grade 12 (T2). At T0, 5,458 (85.7%) adolescents participated. The educational strategy consists of nutritional lessons, working groups and a final party. The screening strategy consists in detecting overweight/obesity and eating disorders in adolescents and proposing, if necessary, an adapted care management program of 7 group educational sessions. The environmental strategy consists in improving dietary and physical activity offerings in high schools and facilities, especially catering. The main outcomes are body size evolution over time, nutritional behaviour and knowledge, health and quality of life. An evaluation process documents how each intervention strategy is implemented in the schools and estimates the dose of the intervention, allowing for a per protocol analysis after the main intention-to-treat analysis.DiscussionPRALIMAP aims at improving the prevention and management of overweight and obesity in adolescents by translating current evidence into public health practice. Particular attention is paid to clustering, multiple factorials and long-term duration to address common pitfalls in health promotion trials. The results should inform how best to implement, in a school environment, effective nutrition prevention programs targeting adolescents who are at a point their lives when they develop responsibilities and empowerment for health attitude behaviours.Trial registrationThis trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under NCT00814554.

Abstract:The PRALIMAP (PRomotion de l'ALIMentation et de l'Activité Physique) trial highlights the effectiveness of implementing a screening strategy in high schools to prevent overweight/obesity among adolescents. The strategy comprises three steps: i) body measurements to detect overweight/obese adolescents, ii) a medical interview with each adolescent identified to discuss the findings, and iii) an adapted care management consisting of seven group educational sessions. A process evaluation was conducted in the PRALIMAP trial to assess the effective implementation of the screening strategy activities, and the participation of adolescents and school professionals in them, from a qualitative and a quantitative point of view. The present paper describes the process and the implementation of the screening strategy as performed in the PRALIMAP trial, and discusses the feasibility of such an intervention in high school settings. The ability of nurses to explain the screening results improved with the addition of specialist support. The ability of adolescents to take part in the screening strategy improved when the adapted care management was conducted inside schools and could be increased even further if the waiting time between the three steps could be minimised. (Global Health Promotion, 2013; 20 Supp. 2: 76-82).

This study assessed the role of certain individual characteristics in school injury among male and female adolescents. The sample included 2,398 subjects attending middle schools and high schools. Respondents completed a self-administered questionnaire at the beginning of the school year. School nurse completed a questionnaire on injury for each school injury occurred during the school year. The data was analyzed with the adjusted odds ratios (ORa) computed via the logistic models. The school injury was common (13% for both sexes). Sports/physical training injury was more frequent among girls (8.8% vs. 6.6%, P < 0.05) contrarily to the other types of injury (4.6% vs. 8.8%, P = 0.001). Sports/physical training injury was strongly associated with age <15 years (ORa 3.42) and presence of previous injury (2.63) among boys, and with age <15 years (2.02), presence of previous injury (2.94), not easily irritated (1.89), and irresponsible (1.59) among girls. The other types of injury were highly related to age <15 years (ORa 4.18), frequent use of psychotropic drugs (1.76), not living with both parents (1.65), being not calm (2.03), and presence of previous injury (1.82) among boys, and to age <15 years (2.59), obesity (3.24), and being not calm (1.84) among girls. The present study identified a number of potential risk factors for school injury among male and female adolescents. Preventive measures should be taken to make adolescents, their parents and teachers more aware of the risks and to find remedial measures.

BackgroundAlthough the outcomes of health promotion and prevention programmes may depend on the level of intervention, studies and trials often fail to take it into account. The objective of this work was to develop a framework within which to consider the implementation of interventions, and to propose a tool with which to measure the quantity and the quality of activities, whether planned or not, relevant to the intervention under investigation. The framework and the tool were applied to data from the diet and physical activity promotion PRALIMAP trial.MethodsA framework allowing for calculation of an intervention dose in any health promotion programme was developed. A literature reviews revealed several relevant concepts that were considered in greater detail by a multidisciplinary working group. A method was devised with which to calculate the dose of intervention planned and that is actually received (programme-driven activities dose), as well as the amount of non-planned intervention (non-programme-driven activities dose).ResultsIndicators cover the roles of all those involved (supervisors, anchor personnel as receivers and providers, targets), in each intervention-related groups (IRG: basic setting in which a given intervention is planned by the programme and may differ in implementation level) and for every intervention period. All indicators are described according to two domains (delivery, participation) in two declensions (quantity and quality). Application to PRALIMAP data revealed important inter- and intra-IRG variability in intervention dose.ConclusionsA literature analysis shows that the terminology in this area is not yet consolidated and that research is ongoing. The present work provides a methodological framework by specifying concepts, by defining new constructs and by developing multiple information synthesis methods which must be introduced from the programme's conception. Application to PRALIMAP underlined the feasibility of measuring the implementation level. The framework and the tool can be used in any complex programme evaluation. The intervention doses obtained could be particularly useful in comparative trials.Trial registrationPRALIMAP is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under NCT00814554