| Literature DB >> 34886571 |
Margarida Vieira1, Andreia Teixeira2,3,4, Graça S Carvalho1.
Abstract
Effective interventions for guiding children to change behaviours are needed to tackle obesity. We evaluated the effectiveness of the 'Planning Health in School' programme (PHS-pro) on children's nutritional status. A non-randomised control group pretest-posttest trial was conducted at elementary schools of a sub-urban municipality in Porto's metropolitan area (Portugal). A total of 504 children of grade-6, aged 10-14, were assigned in two groups: children of one school as the intervention group (IG), and three schools as the control group (CG). Anthropometric measures included height, weight, waist circumference (WC), BMI and waist-to-height ratio (WHtR), and lifestyle behaviours (self-reported questionnaire) were assessed at baseline and after PHS-pro. IG children grew significantly taller more than CG ones (p < 0.001). WC had reduced significantly in IG (-0.4 cm) whereas in the CG had increased (+0.3 cm; p = 0.015), and WHtR of IG showed a significant reduction (p = 0.002) compared with CG. After PHS-pro, IG children consumed significantly fewer soft drinks (p = 0.043) and ate more fruit and vegetables daily than CG. Physical activity time increased significantly in IG (p = 0.022), while CG maintained the same activity level. The PHS-pro did improve anthropometric outcomes effectively leading to better nutritional status and appears to be promising in reducing overweight and obesity.Entities:
Keywords: eating behaviour; nutritional status; obesity prevention; physical activity; school-based intervention
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34886571 PMCID: PMC8657562 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph182312846
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Flow chart of recruitment and sample selection.
Demographical and socio-economical characteristics of intervention group (IG) and control group (CG).
| Total | IG | CG | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years), mean (SD) | 11.2 | 0.6 | 11.2 | 0.6 | 11.2 | 0.64 | 0.736 a |
| Gender, n (%) | 0.368 b | ||||||
| Boys | 226 | 50.3 | 115 | 52.5 | 111 | 48.3 | |
| Girls | 223 | 49.7 | 104 | 47.5 | 119 | 51.7 | |
| Maternal Education, n (%) | 0.058 a | ||||||
| Do not know | 27 | 6 | 16 | 7.3 | 11 | 4.8 | |
| Primary school (grade 4) | 91 | 20.3 | 40 | 18.3 | 51 | 22.2 | |
| Secondary school (grade 6) | 114 | 25.4 | 46 | 21 | 68 | 29.6 | |
| (grade 9) | 108 | 24.1 | 52 | 23.7 | 56 | 24.3 | |
| (grade 12) | 82 | 18.3 | 50 | 22.8 | 32 | 13.9 | |
| University degree | 27 | 6 | 15 | 6.8 | 12 | 5.2 | |
| Paternal Education, n (%) | 0.017 a,* | ||||||
| Do not know | 45 | 10 | 28 | 12.8 | 18 | 7.8 | |
| Primary school (grade 4) | 86 | 19.2 | 37 | 16.9 | 49 | 21.3 | |
| Secondary school (grade 6) | 157 | 35 | 66 | 30.1 | 91 | 39.6 | |
| (grade 9) | 78 | 17.4 | 47 | 21.5 | 31 | 13.5 | |
| (grade 12) | 52 | 11.6 | 30 | 13.7 | 22 | 9.6 | |
| University degree | 30 | 6.7 | 11 | 5 | 19 | 8.3 | |
| Maternal Occupation, n (%) | 0.020 b,* | ||||||
| No answer | 11 | 2.4 | 10 | 4.6 | 1 | 0.4 | |
| Unemployed | 80 | 17.8 | 39 | 17.8 | 41 | 17.8 | |
| Worker | 355 | 79.1 | 168 | 76.7 | 187 | 81.3 | |
| Retired | 3 | 0.7 | 2 | 0.9 | 1 | 0.4 | |
| Paternal Occupation, n (%) | 0.013 b,* | ||||||
| No answer | 18 | 4 | 13 | 5.9 | 5 | 2.2 | |
| Unemployed | 35 | 7.8 | 22 | 10 | 13 | 5.7 | |
| Worker | 393 | 87.5 | 184 | 84 | 209 | 90.9 | |
| Retired | 3 | 0.7 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1.3 | |
a, χ2 test; b, Fisher’s exact test. * p < 0.05.
Anthropometric measures of intervention group (IG) and control group (CG) at baseline.
| Total | IG | CG | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anthropometric data, Mean (SD) | ||||
| Weight (kg) | 46.1 (1.1) | 44.7 (11.1) | 47.4 (11.5) | 0.012 * |
| Weight z-score | 1.0 (1.1) | 0.9 (1.1) | 1.2 (1.1) | 0.005 * |
| Height (cm) | 148.8 (7.1) | 148.3 (7.0) | 149.3 (7.2) | 0.11 |
| Height z-score | 0.6 (1.0) | 0.5 (1.0) | 0.7 (1.0) | 0.066 |
| Waist Circumference | 74.8 (1.1) | 73.8 (10.8) | 75.7 (10.9) | 0.065 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 20.6 (4.0) | 20.2 (4.0) | 21.1 (4.1) | 0.017 * |
| BMI z-score | 1.0 (1.2) | 0.8 (1.3) | 1.1 (1.2) | 0.008 * |
| WHtR (waist-to-height ratio) | 0.5 (0.1) | 0.5 (0.1) | 0.5 (0.1) | 0.135 |
| IOTF Classification, n (%) | 0.038 b,* | |||
| Underweight | 16 (3.6) | 12 (5.5) | 4 (1.7) | |
| Normal | 239 (53.2) | 124 (56.6) | 115 (50.0) | |
| Overweight | 136 (30.3) | 60 (27.4) | 76 (33.0) | |
| Obesity | 58 (12.9) | 23 (10.5) | 35 (15.2) | |
| WC Percentiles, n (%) | 0.106 b | |||
| P5 | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | |
| P10 | 3 (0.7) | 3 (1.4) | 0 (0.0) | |
| P25 | 12 (2.7) | 9 (4.1) | 3 (1.3) | |
| P50 | 44 (9.8) | 23 (10.5) | 21 (9.1) | |
| P75 | 64 (14.3) | 31 (14.2) | 33 (14.3) | |
| P90 | 48 (10.7) | 27 (12.3) | 21 (9.1) | |
| P95 | 278 (61.9) | 126 (57.5) | 152 (66.1) |
b χ2 test. * p < 0.05.
Changes in anthropometric measures for intervention (n = 219) and control group (n = 230).
| IG ∆ | CG ∆ | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | SD | Mean | SD | ||
| Height (cm) | 3.5944 | 1.3127 | 3.0914 | 1.3055 | <0.001 a,* |
| Girls | 3.4018 | 1.2548 | 2.9634 | 1.2789 | 0.011 a,* |
| Boys | 3.7685 | 1.3447 | 3.2286 | 1.3255 | 0.003 a,* |
| Height z-score | 0.0449 | 0.2382 | −0.0212 | 0.2445 | 0.004 a,* |
| Weight (kg) | 2.4493 | 2.1711 | 2.4078 | 2.3756 | 0.847 a |
| Girls | 2.6058 | 2.1822 | 2.5966 | 2.3211 | 0.976 a |
| Boys | 2.3078 | 2.1608 | 2.2054 | 2.4269 | 0.738 a |
| Weight z-score | −0.0189 | 0.2441 | −0.0316 | 0.2521 | 0.588 a |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 0.1216 | 0.9395 | 0.2078 | 1.0113 | 0.351 a |
| Girls | 0.2445 | 0.9379 | 0.3374 | 0.9398 | 0.462 a |
| Boys | 0.0105 | 0.9310 | 0.0689 | 1.0695 | 0.662 a |
| BMI z-score | −0.0762 | 0.2971 | −0.0632 | 0.3264 | 0.659 a |
| Waist Circumference (cm) | −0.3745 | 2.8105 | 0.2970 | 2.9844 | 0.015 a,* |
| Girls | −0.4708 | 3.0458 | 0.4297 | 2.8240 | 0.023 a,* |
| Boys | −0.2875 | 2.5898 | 0.1546 | 3.1539 | 0.250 a |
| WHtR (waist-to-height ratio) | −0.0142 | 0.0195 | −0.0082 | 0.0204 | 0.002 a,* |
IG, intervention group; CG, control group. (Δ) indicates the change observed for the specific variable over the intervention period. a: t-test. *: p ≤ 0.05. Table 3 is presented with more than two decimal places in order to allow to look at the differences found.
Changes on eating, physical activity, and sedentary habits for intervention (n = 219) and control group (n = 230).
| Baseline | Follow-Up | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IG | CG |
| IG | CG |
| ||
| Eating habits (servings/day) | |||||||
| F&V | 0.167 b | 0.158 b | IG:0.068 a CG:0.002 a, | ||||
| Soft drinks | 0.072 b | 0.132 b | IG: 0.043 a, | ||||
| High sugar food | 0.944 b | 0.636b | IG: 0.591 a CG: 0.401 a | ||||
| High-fat food | 0.573 b | 0.541 b | IG: 0.643 a CG: 0.615 a | ||||
| High-energy dense food | 0.777 b | 0.090 b | IG: 0.253 a | ||||
| Physical activities, | 0.171 b | 0.104 b | IG:0.022 a, | ||||
| Watching TV plus video games, (min/day) | 0.335 b | 0.877 b | IG:0.006 a, | ||||
IG, intervention group; CG, control group; IQR, interquartile range; P5, percentile 5; P95, percentile 95. a: Wilcoxon test. b: Mann-Whitney test. *: p ≤ 0.05.