| Literature DB >> 25884183 |
Daniel Parnell1, Andy Pringle2, Jim McKenna3, Stephen Zwolinsky4, Zoe Rutherford5, Jackie Hargreaves6, Lizzie Trotter7, Michael Rigby8, David Richardson9.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Older adults (OA) represent a core priority group for physical activity and Public Health policy. As a result, significant interest is placed on how to optimise adherence to interventions promoting these approaches. Extra Time (ET) is an example of a national programme of physical activity interventions delivered in professional football clubs for OA aged 55+ years. This paper aims to examine the outcomes from ET, and unpick the processes by which these outcomes were achieved.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25884183 PMCID: PMC4397882 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-015-1560-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Public Health ISSN: 1471-2458 Impact factor: 3.295
Examples of local steering group partnerships
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Bristol Rovers |
| Providing initial and on-going advice about working with OA and the referral of OA. |
|
| Financial support along with advice on the local strategic fit and how the project fitted with their priorities. | |
| Colchester United |
| Identifying five day centres to host the PA delivery and specific guidance the delivery of PA for OA. |
|
| Providing a broad knowledge of local issues and arranging additional support/access to services e.g. Health visitors. | |
| Rotherham United |
| To lead in the development of the project, build capacity and provide continued support and guidance. |
|
| To provide and share information relevant for delivering a bespoke OA intervention. | |
| Scunthorpe United |
| To play a key role in developing the pilot intervention and assist in gaining access too hard to reach groups. |
|
| Providing advice on intervention development and OA referrals to the ET project. | |
| QPR |
| Provide advice and recommend delivery strategies for OA |
Extra time programme by club based intervention, participants and design
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| 1* | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| 2** | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||||
| 3* | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||||
| 4** | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| 5** | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||||||||
| 6** | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||
| 7* | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||
| 8* | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| 9* | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| 10** | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||||
| 11** | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| 12** | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| 13* | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||
| 14* | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||||
| 15** | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| 16** | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||||||||
| 17** | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| 18** | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||||||
| 19** | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| 20** | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||
Key: *Football club has been funded from year one, **Football club has been funded from year two, WB = White British, BME = Black, Minority, Ethnic.
Socio demographic characteristics of respondents
|
| ||
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
| Gender (n = 486) |
| 40.3 (196) |
|
| 59.7 (290) | |
| Age (n = 486) |
| 5.3 (26) |
|
| 4.5 (22) | |
|
| 21.6 (105) | |
|
| 18.9 (92) | |
|
| 14.8 (72) | |
|
| 14.0 (68) | |
|
| 20.8 (101) | |
| Ethnicity (n = 486) |
| 95.1 (462) |
|
| 2.3 (11) | |
|
| 0.4 (2) | |
|
| 0.2 (1) | |
|
| 0.8 (4) | |
|
| 1.2 (6) | |
| Registered disability (n = 486) |
| 9.7 (47) |
|
| 90.3 (439) |
Process evaluation themes and sub-themes
|
|
|
|---|---|
|
| The appeal of the football club |
| Building on existing, and developing new community networks | |
| Spreading the word | |
| Strategies to build interest in ET | |
|
| Increasing opportunities to play football |
| Enjoyable activities | |
| Enriching opportunities to socialise |