Childcare Center Characteristics Moderate the Effects of a Physical Activity Intervention

Abstract

Center-based early childhood education and care (ECEC) programs are well-positioned to create positive impacts on the health and development of large numbers of young children by promoting physical activity using evidence-based programs. Studies testing physical activity programs for young children should examine the circumstances under which programs are most effective by assessing the role of contextual factors on program outcomes. The purpose of this study was to examine the moderating effects of baseline ECEC center characteristics on the relationship between the Study of Health and Activity in Preschool Environments (SHAPES) intervention and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA). MVPA was assessed via accelerometry; center characteristics, practices, and social and physical environments were assessed by director interview and observation; and center quality was assessed using the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale-Revised Edition. Mixed-model analyses of covariance (ANCOVAs) examined intervention effects on MVPA during the school day; interactions between baseline center variables and group assignment (intervention vs. control) tested for moderation. Two center instructional practices, two social environment characteristics, and one physical environment characteristic at baseline moderated the effects of SHAPES on MVPA outcomes. Assessing baseline practices and center characteristics may aid efforts to match centers with interventions likely to increase physical activity as well as suggest additional intervention strategies to test.

Environmental and practice factors associated with children’s device-measured physical activity and sedentary time in early childhood education and care centres: a systematic review

“…Eleven studies (12 articles) related the size of the outdoor play area to children's PA and ST. Of the 11 studies, nine were cross-sectional studies, one was a controlled before-after study [27] and one was a randomised controlled trial [59]. Five studies were conducted in Australia [20,27,[60][61][62], three in the USA [26,54,59] and one in Denmark [56]. One study, reported in two articles, was conducted in both the USA and Sweden [16,63].…”

“…Two studies used smaller sizes of outdoor play areas as reference thresholds for comparison: ≤200m 2 versus 900m 2 and > 2700 m 2 [64], and < 386 m 2 versus ≥386m 2 [26]. Another three studies defined larger playground sizes for comparison: <505m 2 versus ≥505m 2 [54], < 1038 m 2 versus ≥1038m 2 [59], and < 1200 m 2 versus 3000m 2 and ≥ 3000 m 2 [16,63]. Olesen et al measured the size of accessible playground area across ECECs and used them as continuous variables ranging from 567m 2 to 5175 m 2 [56].…”

“…Commonly, this was due to insufficient detail about methods used to record exposures. All four RCTs were rated as 'can't tell' for whether the outcome had been accurately assessed to minimise bias [47,59,65,70].…”

A Summary of One Research Team’s Contributions to Understanding Physical Activity Behavior in Children and Youth

“…CPARG study designs, intervention designs, partnerships with stakeholders, measurement, analyses, implementation strategies, and implementation monitoring grew in sophistication over time as we learned from experience. Investigators should plan from the beginning to facilitate and measure sustainability of change, as in LEAP [ 92 , 96 ] and to conduct dissemination and translation research in order to get effective interventions out in the “real world,” as in SHAPES [ 101 , 102 ].…”