Interventions to promote young people’s physical activity: Issues, implications and recommendations for practice

Abstract

There has been increased interest in the development and implementation of physical activity interventions designed to increase young people’s physical activity participation in recent years. This is perhaps founded on concerns over youngsters’ physical activity levels and the possible health consequences. School-based interventions are the most common form of intervention but, given that the majority of young people’s physical activity occurs outside school, there is now growing recognition of the importance of community-based programmes and the involvement of the community at all levels if interventions are to be effective. Based on previous reviews of the findings of formally evaluated interventions, this article considers the evidence base for the effectiveness of school and community-based physical activity interventions. Despite limitations in the literature, it reveals that physical activity interventions with young people can be effective and achieve positive outcomes. The interventions are discussed and a number of issues and observations are highlighted concerning the programme types, target populations, and their design and implementation. Based on this discussion, a number of recommendations for physical activity promotion practice are then made. The article concludes that, until a stronger evidence base becomes available, health professionals, physical educators and other practitioners should be encouraged to plan, implement and evaluate physical activity programmes for young people and draw on such recommendations to inform their practice.

Impact of a six-month empowerment-based exercise intervention programme in non-physically active adolescent Swedish girls

“…This Table 3. General self-efficacy (GSES), specific self-efficacy (SSBESQ), BMI and physical fitness: Comparisons within the intervention (IG) and control groups (CG) result is somewhat similar to that determined in other studies that failed to identify significant changes in perceived self-efficacy after an exercise intervention 18,19 . One possible explanation is that the EIP design was not optimal in terms of enabling the participants to perceive trust in engaging in exercise despite barriers.…”

Fatores associados à atividade física, comportamento sedentário e participação na Educação Física em estudantes do Ensino Médio em Santa Catarina, Brasil

“…Acredita-se que a participação na Educação Física contribua para o aumento da atividade físi-ca habitual, como evidenciado em programas de intervenção 20,21,22 , pesquisas transversais 13,31,33 e longitudinal 15 . Hoehrer et al 21 realizaram uma revisão sistemática das intervenções conduzidas na América Latina e observaram que o nível de evidências dos estudos e das recomendações sugeridas pelo Community Guide Guidelines são sustentáveis e consistentes na afirmação de que as intervenções baseadas na escola melhora o ní-vel de atividade física.…”

“…Contudo, pesquisas relataram que os jovens participam, cada vez menos, das aulas de Educação Física 15 e aqueles engajados têm apresentado baixa participação em atividades de intensidade moderada a vigorosa durante as aulas 16,17,18,19 . Por outro lado, diversos programas de intervenção têm demonstrado a efetividade dessa prática para promover aumento de atividade física geral 20,21,22 .…”

Physical activity patterns in French youth—From childhood to adolescence—Monitored with high‐frequency accelerometry

“…Boys are generally more active than girls (Armstrong, 1998;Andersen et al, 2006;Jackson et al, 2003;Riddoch et al, 2004;Santos et al, 2003;Trost et al, 2002) and the PA decrease is higher in boys than in girls. Schools provide a unique opportunity to help children and adolescents to accumulate physical activity within the school day to benefit their health (Cale and Harris, 2006). Several studies have found that children are more active during school days (Falgairette et al, 1996;Gavarry et al, 1998Gavarry et al, , 2003Rowlands et al, 2008;Sleap and Warburton, 1996) while others reported higher PA levels during free days (Duncan et al, 2006;Gidlow et al, 2008;Pate et al, 1994;Trost et al, 2000) or no difference according to the day of the week (Gilbey and Gilbey, 1995;Salo and Silla, 1997;Taylor et al, 2009).…”