BACKGROUND: Despite the promising findings related to the efficacy of interventions aimed at promoting physical activity (PA) in primary health care (PHC), the translation of these interventions to PHC practice does not always happen as desired. PURPOSE: To help understand why efficacious PHC-based PA interventions are not effectively translated to practice, this study systematically reviewed the literature on factors influencing PHC professionals' PA promotion practices. METHOD: Literature searches were conducted in Web of Science, PubMed, and PsycINFO for peer-reviewed articles published in English from 1990 onwards. Studies were included that met the following criteria: (1) involving PHC-based PA interventions, and (2) reporting factors influencing PHC professionals' PA promotion behaviors. Two researchers independently screened studies and extracted data. A narrative synthesis using thematic analysis was conducted to identify factors. RESULTS: Of the 4,469 identified articles, 59 were included in the review. Factors were identified by qualitative methods, barrier/facilitator ratings, and the examination of the relationship between factors and PA promotion, and the effectiveness of introduction strategies. Many factors related to the development, delivery, and effects of the innovation, the sociopolitical and organizational culture, resources, and support, patient and PHC professional characteristics, and innovation strategies were identified as potential influences on PHC professionals' PA promotion practices. However, the lack of evidence on the relationship between factors and PA promotion indicated insufficient evidence on PA promotion determinants. CONCLUSION: This extensive overview of potential factors can inform intervention developers and implementers on which factors may play a role when introducing PA interventions in PHC. Future research should further investigate relationships between factors and PA promotion, which should be guided by qualitative in-depth knowledge on influencing factors.
BACKGROUND: Despite the promising findings related to the efficacy of interventions aimed at promoting physical activity (PA) in primary health care (PHC), the translation of these interventions to PHC practice does not always happen as desired. PURPOSE: To help understand why efficacious PHC-based PA interventions are not effectively translated to practice, this study systematically reviewed the literature on factors influencing PHC professionals' PA promotion practices. METHOD: Literature searches were conducted in Web of Science, PubMed, and PsycINFO for peer-reviewed articles published in English from 1990 onwards. Studies were included that met the following criteria: (1) involving PHC-based PA interventions, and (2) reporting factors influencing PHC professionals' PA promotion behaviors. Two researchers independently screened studies and extracted data. A narrative synthesis using thematic analysis was conducted to identify factors. RESULTS: Of the 4,469 identified articles, 59 were included in the review. Factors were identified by qualitative methods, barrier/facilitator ratings, and the examination of the relationship between factors and PA promotion, and the effectiveness of introduction strategies. Many factors related to the development, delivery, and effects of the innovation, the sociopolitical and organizational culture, resources, and support, patient and PHC professional characteristics, and innovation strategies were identified as potential influences on PHC professionals' PA promotion practices. However, the lack of evidence on the relationship between factors and PA promotion indicated insufficient evidence on PA promotion determinants. CONCLUSION: This extensive overview of potential factors can inform intervention developers and implementers on which factors may play a role when introducing PA interventions in PHC. Future research should further investigate relationships between factors and PA promotion, which should be guided by qualitative in-depth knowledge on influencing factors.
Authors: E C Allenspach; M Handschin; M Kutlar Joss; A Hauser; M Nüscheler; L Grize; C Braun-Fahrländer Journal: Swiss Med Wkly Date: 2007-05-19 Impact factor: 2.193
Authors: Keegan Knittle; Sarah J Charman; Sophie O'Connell; Leah Avery; Michael Catt; Falko F Sniehotta; Michael I Trenell Journal: JMIR Cardio Date: 2022-06-29
Authors: Anna Puig-Ribera; Carlos Martín-Cantera; Elisa Puigdomenech; Jordi Real; Montserrat Romaguera; José Félix Magdalena-Belio; Jose Ignacio Recio-Rodríguez; Beatriz Rodriguez-Martin; Maria Soledad Arietaleanizbeaskoa; Irene Repiso-Gento; Luis Garcia-Ortiz Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-09-17 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Alex A Florindo; Ross C Brownson; Gregore I Mielke; Grace Ao Gomes; Diana C Parra; Fernando V Siqueira; Felipe Lobelo; Eduardo J Simoes; Luiz R Ramos; Mário M Bracco; Pedro C Hallal Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2015-04-09 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Bhupendrasinh F Chauhan; Maya M Jeyaraman; Amrinder Singh Mann; Justin Lys; Becky Skidmore; Kathryn M Sibley; Ahmed M Abou-Setta; Ryan Zarychanski Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2017-01-05 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Karolina Horodyska; Aleksandra Luszczynska; Catherine B Hayes; Miriam P O'Shea; Lars J Langøien; Gun Roos; Matthijs van den Berg; Marieke Hendriksen; Ilse De Bourdeaudhuij; Johannes Brug Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2015-12-17 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Karlijn E F Leenaars; Annemiek M E Florisson; Eva Smit; Annemarie Wagemakers; Gerard R M Molleman; Maria A Koelen Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2016-09-21 Impact factor: 3.295