Social marketing interventions to promote physical activity among 60 years and older: a systematic review of the literature

Abstract

Background: Falls are a significant source of morbidity in people aged 65 and over, affecting one in three people in this age group. The scientific evidence indicates that physical activity is the most effective method for preventing falls among seniors. Although public health professionals often use social marketing to design and plan successful interventions, its use to promote physical activity and prevent falls among older people remains low. This article aims to provide a new systematic literature review of social marketing interventions promoting physical activity and targeting people aged 60 and over.Methods: Following CRD’s guidance and PRISMA guidelines, we searched between January 2008 and July 2019 for relevant articles in five primary databases using predefined search and inclusion criteria. Two independent reviewers analysed the selected articles to identify evidence of the seven social marketing benchmark criteria, defined by experts in the field as the common elements that contribute to social marketing success.Results: The final review included nine studies. Of the studies selected, three specifically targeted over 60-year-olds, whereas the others segmented the population into several age-based subcategories, including over 60-year-olds. Eight studies highlighted positive results for the participants with an increase in participation or an increase in physical activity level. None of the nine studies selected for this systematic review implemented the entire social marketing approach.Conclusion: Few published interventions use the seven social marketing criteria. Further research is required to encourage uptake and inclusion in successful social marketing interventions to increase program effectiveness in this target population.

Social Marketing Intervention to Engage Older Adults in Balance Workshops for Fall Prevention: A Multicenter Quasi-Experimental Protocol Study

“…However, it is difficult to evaluate the efficiency of Social Marketing in promoting PA among seniors. Few strategies used so far did not apply all the seven benchmark criteria ( 49 ). Fujihira et al ( 41 ) and Goethals et al ( 49 ) have showed that as a program frequently uses the social marketing benchmark criteria defined by Andreasen, it becomes more and more effective at changing the behaviors of its target population.…”

“…Few strategies used so far did not apply all the seven benchmark criteria ( 49 ). Fujihira et al ( 41 ) and Goethals et al ( 49 ) have showed that as a program frequently uses the social marketing benchmark criteria defined by Andreasen, it becomes more and more effective at changing the behaviors of its target population. Other reviews ( 18 , 19 , 50 ) have used the same classification criteria as Andreasen and reported similar findings.…”

“…Other reviews ( 18 , 19 , 50 ) have used the same classification criteria as Andreasen and reported similar findings. Social Marketing may therefore be potentially efficient in promoting PA among seniors ( 49 ). Given its increased use in such initiatives ( 51 ), we aimed at confirming its effectiveness among older adults.…”

Impact of Home Quarantine on Physical Activity Among Older Adults Living at Home During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Qualitative Interview Study (Preprint)

“…The interviewees were sports trainers and older adults who were participating in the Social MArketing and Physical activity in Elderly (SMAPE) study [13]. The main objective of the SMAPE study was to determine whether a social marketing program based on the promotion of group balance workshops for people aged 60 years and over increases their attendance rate in sessions of "activities adapted physical skills."…”

Correction to: Social marketing interventions to promote physical activity among 60 years and older: a systematic review of the literature

“…It was highlighted that the original article [ 1 ] contained an error in Table 3 . Also, two previous studies (Kamada et al 2013, Kamada et al 2015) were mentioned in the Discussion section but were missing from the reference list.…”