| Literature DB >> 30683803 |
Lucia Tarro1,2, Elisabet Llauradó1, Magaly Aceves-Martins1, David Moriña3, Ignasi Papell-Garcia2, Lluis Arola2,4, Montse Giralt1,5, Rosa Solà1,2,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Encouraging healthy lifestyles in children is a challenge. This project aimed to improve lifestyles of younger peers by engaging adolescent creators (ACs) to design and implement peer-led and social marketing (SM) health-promoting activities.Entities:
Keywords: health behaviour; health promotion; lifestyle; public health
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30683803 PMCID: PMC6581153 DOI: 10.1136/jech-2017-210163
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Epidemiol Community Health ISSN: 0143-005X Impact factor: 3.710
Figure 1Activities in the European Youth Tackling Obesity-Kids project designed and implemented by adolescent creators (ACs).
Figure 2Flow diagram of the participants in the European Youth Tackling Obesity-Kids project.
Description of the children and adolescents at baseline
| Intervention group | Control group | |||
| Children (n=375) | Adolescents (n=94) | Children (n=327) | Adolescents (n=98) | |
| Age (mean±SD) | 9.21 (0.56) | 13.2 (0.58) | 9.23 (0.59) | 13.1 (0.61) |
| Gender | ||||
| Boys, % (n) | 54.7 (205) | 47.4 (45) | 47.7 (156) | 40.6 (40) |
| Girls, % (n) | 45.3 (170) | 52.6 (49) | 52.3 (171) | 59.4 (58) |
| Ethnicity | ||||
| West Europe, % (n) | 55.2 (207) | 85.1 (82) | 73.7 (241) | 80.4 (78) |
| East Mediterranean, % (n) | 31.2 (117) | 8.9 (6) | 14.7 (48) | 8.3 (9) |
| East-Central Europe, % (n) | 2.9 (11) | 2.0 (2) | 4.0 (13) | 4.1 (4) |
| American Regions, % (n) | 8.3 (31) | 3.0 (3) | 6.4 (21) | 6.2 (6) |
| African Regions, % (n) | 1.3 (5) | 1.0 (1) | 0.3 (1) | 0 |
| South-West Asia, % (n) | 0.3 (1) | 0 | 0 | 1.0 (1) |
| West of Pacific, % (n) | 0.8 (3) | 0 | 0.9 (3) | 0 |
Ethnicity was documented according to the WHO (WHO presence in countries, territories and areas, 2015).
Lifestyle of children of the intervention and control groups (comparison of the baseline and end of study values)
| Intervention group (n=375) | Control group (n=327) | P value† intervention versus control | |||||
| Baseline % (n) | End of intervention % (n) | P value* | Baseline % (n) | End of intervention % (n) | P value* | ||
| Primary outcomes | |||||||
| ≥1 Fruit/day | |||||||
| Boys | 45.9 (94) | 52.8 (108) | 0.721 | 40.8 (64) | 47.2 (74) | 0.262 | 0.642 |
| Girls | 44.8 (76) | 54.1 (92) | 0.079 | 42.1 (72) | 43.5 (74) | 0.721 | 0.476 |
| Total | 45.4 (170) | 53.4 (200) |
| 41.5 (136) | 45.2 (148) | 0.346 | 0.476 |
| Physical activity ≥6 hour | |||||||
| Boys | 75.9 (156) | 76.4 (157) | 0.794 | 72.2 (113) | 85.8 (134) |
| 0.140 |
| Girls | 60.9 (103) | 67.8 (115) | 0.190 | 66.5 (114) | 73.5 (126) | 0.177 | 0.479 |
| Total | 69.1 (259) | 72.5 (272) | 0.320 | 69.2 (227) | 79.4 (260) |
| 0.464 |
| Secondary outcomes | |||||||
| ≥1 Vegetable/day | |||||||
| Boys | 36.0 (74) | 35.1 (72) | 0.770 | 28.4 (44) | 38.4 (60) | 0.077 | 0.233 |
| Girls | 38.2 (65) | 35.7 (61) | 0.651 | 26.6 (46) | 32.9 (56) | 0.270 | 0.341 |
| Total | 37.0 (139) | 35.3 (133) | 0.639 | 27.5 (90) | 35.5 (116) |
| 0.143 |
| Screen time ≤2 hour weekdays | |||||||
| Boys | 68.4 (140) | 71.6 (147) | 0.585 | 87.3 (136) | 82.3 (128) | 0.265 |
|
| Girls | 82.0 (139) | 77.6 (132) | 0.378 | 83.1 (142) | 85.7 (147) | 0.585 | 0.678 |
| Total | 74.5 (279) | 74.3 (279) | 0.811 | 85.1 (278) | 84.2 (275) | 0.704 |
|
| Screen time ≤2 hour weekend | |||||||
| Boys | 39.3 (81) | 39.1 (80) | 0.787 | 41.7 (65) | 44.5 (69) | 0.655 | 0.490 |
| Girls | 46.6 (79) | 55.1 (94) | 0.127 | 48.6 (83) | 52.9 (91) | 0.446 | 0.437 |
| Total | 42.6 (160) | 46.4 (174) | 0.326 | 45.3 (148) | 48.9 (160) | 0.372 | 0.652 |
| Every day all sugary drink consumption‡ | |||||||
| Boys | 42.0 (91) | 40.7 (88) | 0.737 | 39.5 (66) | 31.4 (53) | 0.637 | 0.213 |
| Girls | 28.8 (50) | 34.3 (59) | 0.104 | 33.0 (57) | 34.4 (60) | 0.270 | 0.642 |
| Total | 36.2 (149) | 37.8 (156) | 0.620 | 36.4 (128) | 33.3 (117) | 0.443 | 0.386 |
| Never fast food consumption/week | |||||||
| Boys | 80.7 (166) | 82.0 (168) | 0.756 | 84.9 (132) | 85.5 (133) | 0.844 | 0.654 |
| Girls | 79.3 (135) | 81.5 (139) | 0.701 | 90.5 (155) | 86.8 (155) | 0.356 |
|
| Total | 80.1 (301) | 81.8 (307) | 0.597 | 87.9 (287) | 86.2 (287) | 0.599 |
|
The main analysis was based on the intention-to-treat population.
*P value: McNemar tests (changes in each group).
†P value: generalised linear models (differences in the changes from baseline to end of intervention of the intervention and control groups).
‡Sugary drinks, accounting for three categories: commercial juice, sodas and cokes.
Bold typeface indicates p<0.05.
Lifestyles of adolescents of the intervention and control groups (comparison of the baseline to the end of study)
| Intervention group (n=94) | Control group (n=98) | P value† intervention versus control | |||||
| Baseline % (n) | End of intervention % (n) | P value* | Baseline % (n) | End of intervention % (n) | P value* | ||
| Primary outcomes | |||||||
| ≥1 Fruit / day | |||||||
| Boys | 39.5 (15) | 44.4 (17) | 0.729 | 27.6 (12) | 29.3 (13) | 0.958 | 0.517 |
| Girls | 34.6 (21) | 39.2 (23) | 0.683 | 46.9 (23) | 43.5 (21) | 0.814 | 0.210 |
| Total | 36.5 (36) | 41.2 (40) | 0.538 | 37.7 (35) | 36.7 (34) | 0.927 | 0.655 |
| Physical activity ≥6 hours/week | |||||||
| Boys | 86.8 (33) | 83.9 (32) | 0.864 | 86.7 (39) | 87.6 (39) | 0.994 | 0.335 |
| Girls | 69.7 (42) | 81.2 (49) | 0.145 | 69.4 (34) | 67.3 (33) | 1.000 | 0.654 |
| Total | 76.3 (75) | 82.2 (81) | 0.355 | 77.7 (73) | 77.1 (72) | 0.984 | 0.299 |
| Secondary outcomes | |||||||
| ≥1 vegetable / day | |||||||
| Boys | 21.1 (8) | 31.2 (12) | 0.433 | 15.6 (7) | 21.2 (10) | 0.668 | 0.728 |
| Girls | 26.7 (16) | 35.3 (21) | 0.239 | 30.6 (15) | 25.0 (12) | 0.661 | 0.757 |
| Total | 24.5 (24) | 33.7 (33) | 0.112 | 23.4 (22) | 23.2 (22) | 0.999 | 0.735 |
| Screen time ≤2 hour weekdays | |||||||
| Boys | 52.6 (20) | 46.9 (18) | 0.737 | 55.6 (25) | 55.7 (25) | 1.000 | 0.806 |
| Girls | 43.3 (26) | 54.4 (33) | 0.217 | 49.0 (24) | 57.1 (28) | 0.344 | 0.409 |
| Total | 46.9 (46) | 51.5 (51) | 0.564 | 52.1 (49) | 56.4 (53) | 0.538 | 0.451 |
| Screen time ≤2 hour weekend | |||||||
| Boys | 18.4 (7) | 21.8 (8) | 0.836 | 15.6 (7) | 16.5 (7) | 0.986 | 0.587 |
| Girls | 25.0 (15) | 29.5 (18) | 0.700 | 25.7 (13) | 22.4 (11) | 0.856 | 0.233 |
| Total | 22.4 (22) | 26.5 (26) | 0.562 | 20.8 (20) | 19.6 (18) | 0.925 | 0.497 |
| Every day all sugary drink consumption | |||||||
| Boys | 47.5 (18) | 48.3 (18) | 0.877 | 51.1 (23) | 45.0 (20) | 0.685 | 0.624 |
| Girls | 55.0 (33) | 51.2 (31) | 0.748 | 54.2 (27) | 61.2 (30) | 0.715 | 0.451 |
| Total | 52.1 (51) | 50.1 (49) | 0.789 | 52.7 (50) | 53.4 (50) | 0.962 | 0.678 |
| Never fast-food consumption/week | |||||||
| Boys | 86.8 (33) | 87.5 (33) | 0.917 | 86.4 (39) | 77.0 (35) | 0.398 | 0.810 |
| Girls | 91.7 (55) | 90.3 (54) | 0.915 | 79.6 (39) | 79.6 (39) | 1.000 | 0.305 |
| Total | 89.8 (88) | 89.2 (87) | 0.874 | 82.9 (78) | 78.3 (74) | 0.546 | 0.503 |
The main analysis was based on the intention-to-treat population.
*P value: McNemar tests (changes in each group).
†P value: generalised linear models (differences in the changes from baseline to the end of intervention in the intervention and control group).