Elsevier

Preventive Medicine

Volume 76, July 2015, Pages 58-67
Preventive Medicine

Review
Evaluation of physical activity interventions in youth via the Reach, Efficacy/Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework: A systematic review of randomised and non-randomised trials

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2015.04.006Get rights and content

Highlights

  • This paper reviews physical activity interventions targeting youth, ages 12–17.

  • RE-AIM model was used to determine internal and external validity of interventions.

  • Reviewed studies had a shared focus on reporting of internal validity factors.

  • Elements of adoption, implementation and maintenance were under-reported.

  • Future interventions should be designed to account for elements of generalizability.

Abstract

Context

An identified limitation of existing reviews of physical activity interventions in school-aged youth is the lack of reporting on issues related to the translatability of the research into health promotion practice.

Objective

This review used the Reach, Efficacy/Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance framework to determine the extent to which intervention studies promoting physical activity in youth report on factors that inform generalizability across settings and populations.

Methods and results

A systematic search for controlled interventions conducted within the last ten years identified 50 studies that met the selection criteria. Based on Reach, Efficacy/Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance criteria, most of these studies focused on statistically significant findings and internal validity rather than on issues of external validity. Due to this lack of information, it is difficult to determine whether or not reportedly successful interventions are feasible and sustainable in an uncontrolled, real-world setting.

Conclusions

Areas requiring further research include costs associated with recruitment and implementation, adoption rate, and representativeness of participants and settings. This review adds data to support recommendations that interventions promoting physical activity in youth should include assessment of adoption and implementation issues.

Introduction

The literature estimates that physical inactivity contributes to 6–10% of the major non-communicable diseases worldwide (i.e., coronary heart disease, type II diabetes, breast and colon cancers) (Lee et al., 2012). In comparison, regular physical activity (PA) confers benefits that extend well beyond physical health and include a better quality of life, reduced stress, improved sleep, and stronger relationships and social connectedness (Das and Horton, 2012). Therefore, PA can be considered a major contributor to overall physical and mental well-being.

The World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines recommend that for optimal health, children and youth (aged 5 to 17 years) should engage in at least 60 min of moderate- to vigorous-intensity physical activity (MVPA) daily (WHO, 2010). However, a synthesis of self-reported global data from WHO Member States estimate that four of every five youth (aged 13–15 years) do not meet the present guidelines (Hallal et al., 2012). Collectively, the established health benefits of regular MVPA and the reported suboptimal activity levels of youth indicate a need for increased participation in PA among this population.

Addressing this need involves a systematic review of the relevant research in order to identify the characteristics of successful interventions designed to promote PA. Several meta-analytic and narrative reviews focus on the efficacy of PA interventions in children and youth, and thereby attempt to provide evidence of a cause and effect relationship between intervention strategies and increased PA levels in participants (Atkin et al., 2011, Cale and Harris, 2006, De Meester et al., 2009, Dudley et al., 2011, Jago and Baranowski, 2004, Lubans et al., 2009b, Metcalf et al., 2012, Salmon et al., 2007, van Sluijs et al., 2007). Although many of these review articles have commented on the potential lack of generalizability of PA interventions in youth (Brown and Summerbell, 2009, Camacho-Miñano et al., 2011, De Meester et al., 2009, Dobbins et al., 2009, Rees et al., 2006, Kriemler et al., 2011, O'Connor et al., 2009, Timperio et al., 2004, van Sluijs et al., 2011), to date, none has specifically addressed the translatability of the research into health promotion practice or its impact on public health. In other words, existing reviews have focused on the internal validity of studies of PA interventions in youth without systematically addressing issues related to external validity.

External validity is defined as the degree to which study findings are generalizable to groups and environments outside the intervention or experimental setting (Gay et al., 2012). To balance the emphasis on internal and external validity, Glasgow et al. (1999) designed an evaluation framework that expands assessments of interventions beyond efficacy. This Reach, Efficacy/Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework has demonstrated utility in evaluating internal and external validity indicators for a number of health behaviour interventions (e.g., nutrition and PA) (Aittasalo et al., 2006, DerAnanian et al., 2012, Dunton et al., 2009, Jenkinson et al., 2012, Nigg et al., 2012), and has been used in reviews of literature to demonstrate the degree to which researchers reported on external validity issues (Akers et al., 2010, Allen et al., 2011, Antikainen and Ellis, 2011, Dzewaltowski et al., 2004, Glasgow et al., 2004, White et al., 2009).

As conceptualized by Glasgow et al., 1999, Glasgow et al., 2004, reach is a measure of participation characterized by the number, proportion and representativeness of individuals willing to participate in the intervention, and efficacy/effectiveness assesses the impact of an intervention on important outcomes (both positive and negative). The term efficacy applies to trials that test the impact of an intervention under optimum conditions, while the term effectiveness applies to trials that are conducted in real-world settings by individuals who are not part of the research staff (Flay, 1986, Glasgow et al., 2003). Adoption reflects the number, proportion and representativeness of settings and intervention agents who are willing to initiate the intervention, and implementation is concerned with the extent to which the intervention was delivered as intended in the real world. Finally, maintenance assesses the degree to which a programme is sustained over time (Glasgow et al., 1999, Glasgow et al., 2004).

The RE-AIM framework has been used to guide PA interventions in youth, and to evaluate reviews of PA interventions in adults; however, there has yet to be a review of PA interventions in youth conducted using the RE-AIM framework. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to present the findings of a RE-AIM review in order to evaluate the internal and external validity of randomised and non-randomised interventions designed to increase PA behaviour in youth. Specifically, the findings include an assessment of PA intervention generalizability to field settings, and consideration of variables that may moderate intervention efficacy/effectiveness, such as resource availability, implementation fidelity and possible incorporation into the daily routine (Glasgow et al., 2003, Glasgow et al., 2004).

Section snippets

Database search and study inclusion

Five electronic databases (Pubmed, Nursing and Allied Health Literature, SPORTDiscus, PsycINFO, and Educational Resources Information Center) were searched for articles written in English and published in peer-reviewed journals from January 2003 to January 2013. For each database, the following search terms were used: (physical activity OR fitness OR exercise OR physical education OR sport OR running) AND (random OR controlled OR trial OR clinical OR intervention) AND (programmes OR strategy OR

Intervention characteristics

Table 1 summarizes the reviewed interventions, and organizes them by design. For the purposes of this review, intervention effects on measured outcomes were recorded as positive when the individual study authors reported a statistically significant change between intervention and control/comparison groups. This liberal summation resulted in considerable variation in both the magnitude and nature of the positive PA effects, which included increases in self-reported leisure time physical activity

Discussion

The RE-AIM reporting criteria were developed to determine both internal and external validity of interventions by addressing five components important for translation of research findings (Glasgow et al., 1999). Based on these criteria, most of the reviewed studies focused on internal validity (e.g., sample size; efficacy; type, frequency, intensity of intervention) rather than on issues of external validity (e.g., the percentage and representativeness of individuals and settings willing to

Conclusions

Numerous systematic reviews have focused on the efficacy of PA interventions in youth; however, many have commented on the potential lack of generalizability of their findings (e.g., Camacho-Miñano et al., 2011, Kriemler et al., 2011, van Sluijs et al., 2011). To address the identified gap between research findings and their application in real-world settings, this review used the RE-AIM framework to expand the assessment of interventions beyond efficacy. To the best of the authors' knowledge,

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

References (108)

  • C. Hill et al.

    Can theory-based messages in combination with cognitive prompts promote exercise in classroom settings?

    Soc. Sci. Med.

    (2007)
  • R. Jago et al.

    Non-curricular approaches for increasing physical activity in youth: a review

    Prev. Med.

    (2004)
  • R. Jago et al.

    Fit for life boy scout badge: outcome evaluation of a troop internet intervention

    Prev. Med.

    (2006)
  • M.S. Jamner et al.

    A controlled evaluation of a school-based intervention to promote physical activity among sedentary adolescent females: Project FAB

    J. Adolesc. Health

    (2004)
  • E.B. Kahn et al.

    The effectiveness of interventions to increase physical activity: a systematic review

    Am. J. Prev. Med.

    (2002)
  • I. Lee et al.

    Effect of physical inactivity on major non-communicable diseases worldwide: an analysis of burden of disease and life expectancy

    Lancet

    (2012)
  • D.R. Lubans et al.

    Effects of integrating pedometers, parental materials, and e-mail support within an extracurricular school sport intervention

    J. Adolesc. Health

    (2009)
  • D.R. Lubans et al.

    A systematic review of studies using pedometers to promote physical activity among youth

    Prev. Med.

    (2009)
  • J.T. Marks et al.

    A comparison of web and print media for physical activity promotion among adolescent girls

    J. Adolesc. Health

    (2006)
  • L.M. Mauriello et al.

    Results of a multi-media multiple behavior obesity prevention program for adolescents

    Prev. Med.

    (2010)
  • N.M. Murphy et al.

    Physical activity for bone health in inactive teenage girls: is a supervised, teacher-led program or self-led program best?

    J. Adolesc. Health

    (2006)
  • D. Neumark-Sztainer et al.

    New Moves: a school-based obesity prevention program for adolescent girls

    Prev. Med.

    (2003)
  • D.R. Neumark-Sztainer et al.

    New moves — preventing weight-related problems in adolescent girls a group-randomized study

    Am. J. Prev. Med.

    (2010)
  • T.M. O'Connor et al.

    Engaging parents to increase youth physical activity: a systematic review

    Am. J. Prev. Med.

    (2009)
  • R. Ortega-Sanchez et al.

    The effect of office-based physician's advice on adolescent exercise behavior

    Prev. Med.

    (2004)
  • L.R. Peralta et al.

    Promoting healthy lifestyles among adolescent boys: the fitness improvement and lifestyle awareness program RCT

    Prev. Med.

    (2009)
  • J.F. Sallis et al.

    Environmental interventions for eating and physical activity: a randomized controlled trial in middle schools

    Am. J. Prev. Med.

    (2003)
  • C. Simon et al.

    ICAPS: a multilevel program to improve physical activity in adolescents

    Diabetes Metab.

    (2006)
  • S.M. Slootmaker et al.

    Accelerometers and Internet for physical activity promotion in youth? Feasibility and effectiveness of a minimal intervention [ISRCTN93896459]

    Prev. Med.

    (2010)
  • P. Taymoori et al.

    Mediators of behavior change in two tailored physical activity interventions for adolescent girls

    Psychol. Sport Exerc.

    (2008)
  • M. Aittasalo et al.

    From innovation to practice: initiation, implementation and evaluation of a physician-based physical activity promotion programme in Finland

    Health Promot. Int.

    (2006)
  • J.D. Akers et al.

    Translational research: bridging the gap between long-term weight loss maintenance research and practice

    J. Am. Diet. Assoc.

    (2010)
  • K. Allen et al.

    Understanding the internal and external validity of health literacy interventions: a systematic literature review using the RE-AIM framework

    J. Health Commun.

    (2011)
  • I. Antikainen et al.

    A RE-AIM evaluation of theory-based physical activity interventions

    J. Sport Exerc. Psychol.

    (2011)
  • K. Armour et al.

    Changing lives? Critical evaluation of a school-based athlete role model intervention

    Sport Educ. Soc.

    (2012)
  • A.J. Atkin et al.

    Interventions to promote physical activity in young people conducted in the hours immediately after school: a systematic review

    Int. J. Behav. Med.

    (2011)
  • M. Bayne-Smith et al.

    Improvements in heart health behaviors and reduction in coronary artery disease risk factors in urban teenaged girls through a school-based intervention: the PATH program

    Am. J. Public Health

    (2004)
  • M.M. Black et al.

    Challenge! Health promotion/obesity prevention mentorship model among urban, black adolescents

    Pediatrics

    (2010)
  • M. Bronikowski et al.

    Will they stay fit and healthy? A three-year follow-up evaluation of a physical activity and health intervention in Polish youth

    Scand. J. Public Health

    (2011)
  • T. Brown et al.

    Systematic review of school-based interventions that focus on changing dietary intake and physical activity levels to prevent childhood obesity: an update to the obesity guidance produced by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence

    Obes. Rev.

    (2009)
  • P. Bush et al.

    Physical activity promotion among underserved adolescents: “make it fun, easy, and popular”

    Health Promot. Pract.

    (2010)
  • L. Cale et al.

    Interventions to promote young people's physical activity: issues, implications and recommendations for practice

    Health Educ. J.

    (2006)
  • M.J. Camacho-Miñano et al.

    Interventions to promote physical activity among young and adolescent girls: a systematic review

    Health Educ. Res.

    (2011)
  • N.L.D. Chatzisarantis et al.

    Effects of an intervention based on self-determination theory on self-reported leisure-time physical activity participation

    Psychol. Health

    (2009)
  • F. De Meester et al.

    Interventions for promoting physical activity among European teenagers: a systematic review

    Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act.

    (2009)
  • C.A. DerAnanian et al.

    Perceived versus actual factors associated with adoption and maintenance of an evidence-based physical activity program

    Transl. Behav. Med.

    (2012)
  • M. Dobbins et al.

    School-based physical activity programs for promoting physical activity and fitness in children and adolescents aged 6–18 (review)

    Cochrane Database Syst. Rev.

    (2009)
  • D. Dudley et al.

    A systematic review of the effectiveness of physical education and school sport interventions targeting physical activity, movement skills and enjoyment of physical activity

    Eur. Phys. Educ. Rev.

    (2011)
  • G.F. Dunton et al.

    Using the RE-AIM framework to evaluate the statewide dissemination of a school-based physical activity and nutrition curriculum: “exercise your options”

    Am. J. Health Promot.

    (2009)
  • D.A. Dzewaltowski et al.

    Behavior change intervention research in community settings: how generalizable are the results?

    Health Promot. Int.

    (2004)
  • Cited by (45)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text