Effectiveness of intervention on physical activity of children: systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled trials with objectively measured outcomes (EarlyBird 54)

Abstract

Objective To determine whether, and to what extent, physical activity interventions affect the overall activity levels of children.Design Systematic review and meta-analysis.Data sources Electronic databases (Embase, Medline, PsycINFO, SPORTDiscus) and reference lists of included studies and of relevant review articles.Study selection Design: randomised controlled trials or controlled clinical trials (cluster and individual) published in peer reviewed journals. Intervention: incorporated a component designed to increase the physical activity of children/adolescents and was at least four weeks in duration. Outcomes: measured whole day physical activity objectively with accelerometers either before or immediately after the end of the intervention period. Data analysisIntervention effects (standardised mean differences) were calculated for total physical activity, time spent in moderate or vigorous physical activity, or both for each study and pooled using a weighted random effects model. Meta-regression explored the heterogeneity of intervention effects in relation to study participants, design, intervention type, and methodological quality.Results Thirty studies (involving 14 326 participants; 6153 with accelerometer measured physical activity) met the inclusion criteria and all were eligible for meta-analysis/meta-regression. The pooled intervention effect across all studies was small to negligible for total physical activity (standardised mean difference 0.12, 95% confidence interval 0.04 to 0.20; P<0.01) and small for moderate or vigorous activity (0.16, 0.08 to 0.24; P<0.001). Meta-regression indicated that the pooled intervention effect did not differ significantly between any of the subgroups (for example, for total physical activity, standardised mean differences were 0.07 for age <10 years and 0.16 for ≥10 years, P=0.19; 0.07 for body mass index across the entire range and 0.22 for exclusively overweight/obese children, P=0.07; 0.12 for study duration ≤6 months and 0.09 for >6 months, P=0.71; 0.15 for home/family based intervention and 0.10 for school based intervention, P=0.53; and 0.09 for higher quality studies and 0.14 for lower quality studies, P=0.52). ConclusionsThis review provides strong evidence that physical activity interventions have had only a small effect (approximately 4 minutes more walking or running per day) on children's overall activity levels. This finding may explain, in part, why such interventions have had limited success in reducing the body mass index or body fat of children. IntroductionPhysical activity is associated with many health benefits, 1-3 but most children fail to meet national recommendations. [4][5][6] Prevention of obesity in particular is thought to be one of the benefits to being more active, and accordingly most interventions aimed at reducing childhood obesity incorporate a physical activity component. Observational studies consistently show that greater activity is associated (r~−0.2) with lower body mass index and girth, 7-11 yet physical activity int...

Active play: An important physical activity strategy in the fight against childhood obesity

“…Unfortunately, these interventions have minimally impacted the body weight and total PA of children, likely because the amount of PA prescribed was insufficient. 2 Interventions that substantially impact the amount of PA children accumulate could have a more meaningful impact on their body weight, as observed in adults. 3,4 Children accumulate their PA by engaging in active play (also referred to as physically active play, PA play, and active free play) and organized PA such as organized sport, active transportation, and physical education and other organized school activities.…”

Estimates of the energy deficit required to reverse the trend in childhood obesity in Australian schoolchildren

“…In a recent systematic review, Metcalf, Henley and Wilkin carried out a meta‐analysis of interventions to increase physical activity in children and concluded that such interventions had only a small effect (about four minutes more walking or running per day) on children's overall activity levels 6 . Clearly, our present systems are failing and have been doing so for some time 6 . Successive generations of Australian school children have lost their free play and other opportunities to be active have been eroded from daily life 41 .…”

“…We also consider recent systematic reviews and meta‐analyses 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 summarising research efforts – to date, largely unsuccessful – to prevent or reverse obesity in children, and offer some insights into why failure to achieve clinically significant impact is so prevalent and what policies or strategies might increase the chances of success.…”

Physical activity for children in elementary schools: time for a rethink?

“…Unfortunately, however, the accumulated evidence to date suggests that the effectiveness of these interventions have been limited. To illustrate, in a recent meta-analysis that examined the effects of interventions that were tested using controlled trials in relation to objective measures of physical activity among children, the overall effect of the interventions was very small and equated to an average increase of just 4 min more of walking or running per day on children's overall activity levels [4].…”

“…Unfortunately, however, the accumulated evidence to date suggests that the effectiveness of these interventions have been limited. To illustrate, in a recent meta-analysis that examined the effects of interventions that were tested using controlled trials in relation to objective measures of physical activity among children, the overall effect of the interventions was very small and equated to an average increase of just 4 min more of walking or running per day on children's overall activity levels [4].Given the current evidence regarding (a) the small effects that the best pediatric physical activity interventions can deliver, (b) the pervasive levels of inactivity that exist among children, and (c) the considerable health-related and developmental costs associated with inactivity among this population, we propose that it is time for a substantive rethink about our …”