Upload
teresa-bryant
View
214
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The receptiveness of school environments to a community-
based physical activity intervention programme
Baseline data from a pilot study with
primary schools in Limpopo and
GautengPresenters: Dr. Cathi Draper & Ms. Anna Grimsrud
Research Team
University of Cape Town – Exercise Science and Sports
MedicineProf. Vicki Lambert
Dr. Cathi DraperMs. Anna Grimsrud
University of the WitwatersrandProf. Michael RudolphDr. Simon NemutandaniMs. Lauren de Kock
Introduction
• Community Health Intervention Programmes (CHIP’s) Western Cape
• ‘Discovery Healthy Lifestyles Programmes’
• Factors promoting and/or hindering the receptiveness of schools’ physical and social environments
Intervention and control sites
Limpopo Gauteng
Intervention
Control Intervention
Control
Xivodze Junior PrimaryMafarana Senior Primary
Motupa Kgomo Primary
MC Weiler PrimaryCarter Primary Skeen Primary
Zenzelani PrimaryBovet Primary
Schools
Methods
• Situational analysis of the school physical activity environment
• Questionnaire on Community Environment (IPEN)
• Focus groups & semi-structured interviews
Quantitative findings –
Situational Analyses
Space Equipment Time Nutrition
Limpopo Undeveloped Minimal ConstrainedFeeding scheme
Not ideal
GautengSome
developed
Safety issues
Generally abundant
ConstrainedFeeding scheme
Not ideal
Qualitative findings – IPEN
• Community differences– Existing links with community projects
• Living conditions – rural vs peri-urban• Access to basic amenities, e.g.
electricity, running water & sanitation• Availability of resources, e.g. equipment
Community
differences
Qualitative findings – IPEN
• Community differences– Existing links with community projects
• Living conditions – rural vs peri-urban
• Access to basic amenities, e.g. electricity, running water & sanitation
• Availability of resources, e.g. equipment
Rural
Peri-Urban
Qualitative findings – IPEN
• Community differences– Existing links with community projects
• Living conditions – rural vs peri-urban• Access to basic amenities, e.g.
electricity, running water & sanitation
• Availability of resources, e.g. equipment
Basic amenities
Space: developed vs undeveloped
Qualitative findings – Focus Groups &
interviews• Importance of ongoing & sustainable
training and management• Transfer and internalisation of
knowledge• Impact of knowledge on attitudes,
beliefs & behaviour• Increased self-efficacy of leaders• Leaders as role models for members• Role of training staff
Factors promoting and hindering receptiveness
• Common to other SA school environments
• Unique to DHLP’s
Unique factors
• Intersectoral collaboration– Surveillance & evaluation
• Community participation
• Quality of teacher training• Buy-in of teachers• Support for teachers as
leaders• Not a high demand for
equipment, but space is required
Collaborators
Fieldworkers
Educators
Leaders
Clinics
Unique factors
• Intersectoral collaboration– Surveillance & evaluation
• Community participation• Quality of teacher
training• Buy-in of teachers• Support for teachers
as leaders• Not a high demand for
equipment, but space is required
Sustainability
Development & enhancement of skills
Maximises existing community strengths and
resources
Programme ownership by school and community
Nutrition
• Secondary focus of CHIPS intervention
• Feeding schemes: policy vs. practice
• Importance and feasibility
Future research avenues
• Baseline assessment - quantitative & qualitative
• Comparison to national physiological data• Changes attributed to intervention
• Other areas for intervention (e.g. nutrition)• Provide evidence to support expansion
• Factors responsible for intervention fidelity/success
Thank you