Assessment of a two-year school-based physical activity intervention among 7-9-year-old children

Abstract

BackgroundPhysical activity (PA) in children has declined in recent decades, highlighting the need for effective intervention programs for school-aged children. The main objective of this study was to assess to what extent PA during and after school hours changed among children who received a progressive two-year long intervention vs. that of children who only received general curriculum-based PA.MethodsA cluster randomized intervention study was conducted and six elementary schools randomly assigned to serve as control- or intervention schools. All children attending second grade (mean age = 7.4 years - born in 1999) were invited to participate in the fall of 2006 (N = 320, 82% participated), again in 2007 (midpoint) and 2008 (end of intervention). The intervention consisted of multi-component PA-intervention during school hours and was conducted by teachers at each intervention school. PA was assessed by means of accelerometers and subjectively at the intervention schools via teachers' PA log-books.ResultsThere was no difference in PA intensity (minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity - min of MVPA) between the two study groups at baseline, but children in the intervention schools were more physically active at moderate-to-vigorous intensity compared to those in control schools after one year of intervention (mean difference of MVPAlog-minutes: 0.61, 95%CI: 0.02, 1.20, p = 0.04). Moreover, the model for minutes of MVPA during school hours, showed a significant three-way interaction between time at mid-point, group and gender (mean difference of MVPAlog-minutes: 1.06, 95%CI: 0.15, 1.97, p = .02), indicating a significantly greater increase among the boys in the intervention schools compared to girls. No difference in PA was detected between the study groups at the end of the study period after two years of intervention.ConclusionsThe results suggest that the objective of increasing PA at school was met after one year of intervention, and it was more pronounced among boys. The lack of increase at the end of the study period suggested that any increase in PA during school may highly depend on both motivation and training of general teachers. Boys may respond better to PA interventions such as the one described in this study.

Effectiveness of a Playground Intervention for Antisocial, Prosocial, and Physical Activity Behaviors

“…Significant differences observed by sex for MVPA are consistent with other school‐based intervention programs where boys were demonstrated greater absolute increases in MVPA . This finding is counterintuitive because girls, especially older girls, often engage in lower MVPA than boys, thereby having relatively more room for improvement.…”

Effectiveness of after-school interventions at increasing moderate-to-vigorous physical activity levels in 5- to 18-year olds: a systematic review and meta-analysis

“…Similarly, Schuna et al 40 found that boys achieved greater MVPA levels than girls in the Keep It Moving (KIM) after-school programme. This difference between boys and girls has been reported elsewhere in the literature,45 46 though the reasons underlying this remain unclear. This finding suggests that there is a particular need to find ways to increase girls MVPA during extracurricular interventions.…”

An Intervention to Increase Physical Activity in Children

“…Some previous studies have found a greater intervention effect on girls’ physical activity, 45,46 but others have found a greater effect on boys’ physical activity. 21,47–49 In a meta-analysis of physical activity interventions in children, Metcalf et al 50 found no significant differences in intervention effects between sexes, but there was a trend toward girls responding more positively to the interventions than boys. Reviews of school-based obesity interventions suggest that boys and girls may respond differently to interventions, 51,52 with girls potentially favoring educational interventions and boys responding better to environmental interventions.…”