Emma S George1,2, Aymen El Masri3, Dominika Kwasnicka4,5, Alannah Romeo3, Sarah Cavallin3, Andrew Bennie3, Gregory S Kolt3, Justin M Guagliano3. 1. School of Health Sciences, Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia. e.george@westernsydney.edu.au. 2. Translational Health Research Institute (THRI), Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia. e.george@westernsydney.edu.au. 3. School of Health Sciences, Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia. 4. SWPS University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Wroclaw, Poland. 5. NHMRC CRE in Digital Technology to Transform Chronic Disease Outcomes, School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Researchers are capitalising on the strong connections that sport fans have with their teams for health promotion programmes, yet no existing systematic reviews have evaluated the effectiveness of interventions delivered through professional sport. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to systematically collate, evaluate, and synthesise the evidence on health promotion interventions implemented in professional sport settings. METHODS: Randomised controlled trials reporting on adult health promotion initiatives delivered in professional sport settings were identified through electronic database searches in CINAHL, MEDLINE, SPORTDiscus, Scopus, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Google Scholar. Data on health-related outcomes (e.g., weight, physical activity, dietary intake) were extracted and synthesised, and random effects meta-analyses were conducted to examine effects for weight and waist circumference. Risk of bias was examined using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised controlled trials (RoB 2). RESULTS: Six studies reporting on five unique interventions met the inclusion criteria, and all included studies were gender-sensitised and exclusively targeted men. Intervention effects were observed for several health outcomes, including physical activity, dietary intake, and psychosocial health. All studies aimed to reduce weight, and for most studies (n = 4), weight was a primary outcome, either of the included study or to inform a future definitive trial. Findings from the meta-analysis revealed an overall significant difference in change in weight of - 3.2 kg (95% confidence interval [CI] - 4.6 to - 1.8) and waist circumference of - 3.9 cm (95% CI - 4.9 to - 2.8), both in favour of the intervention group at 12 weeks. Intervention effects were also reported for several other health outcomes (e.g., physical activity, dietary intake, psychosocial health); however, they were not consistently measured across the studies and thus were not meta-analysed. CONCLUSION: Health promotion interventions delivered through professional sporting organisations can significantly improve weight- and lifestyle-related health outcomes. Representation across the socioeconomic spectrum and across culturally and linguistically diverse groups was limited. As only a limited number of studies met the inclusion criteria for this review, a need exists for rigorously designed interventions, standardised intervention approaches, with long-term follow-up, and the potential for scalability. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019123295.
BACKGROUND: Researchers are capitalising on the strong connections that sport fans have with their teams for health promotion programmes, yet no existing systematic reviews have evaluated the effectiveness of interventions delivered through professional sport. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to systematically collate, evaluate, and synthesise the evidence on health promotion interventions implemented in professional sport settings. METHODS: Randomised controlled trials reporting on adult health promotion initiatives delivered in professional sport settings were identified through electronic database searches in CINAHL, MEDLINE, SPORTDiscus, Scopus, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Google Scholar. Data on health-related outcomes (e.g., weight, physical activity, dietary intake) were extracted and synthesised, and random effects meta-analyses were conducted to examine effects for weight and waist circumference. Risk of bias was examined using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised controlled trials (RoB 2). RESULTS: Six studies reporting on five unique interventions met the inclusion criteria, and all included studies were gender-sensitised and exclusively targeted men. Intervention effects were observed for several health outcomes, including physical activity, dietary intake, and psychosocial health. All studies aimed to reduce weight, and for most studies (n = 4), weight was a primary outcome, either of the included study or to inform a future definitive trial. Findings from the meta-analysis revealed an overall significant difference in change in weight of - 3.2 kg (95% confidence interval [CI] - 4.6 to - 1.8) and waist circumference of - 3.9 cm (95% CI - 4.9 to - 2.8), both in favour of the intervention group at 12 weeks. Intervention effects were also reported for several other health outcomes (e.g., physical activity, dietary intake, psychosocial health); however, they were not consistently measured across the studies and thus were not meta-analysed. CONCLUSION: Health promotion interventions delivered through professional sporting organisations can significantly improve weight- and lifestyle-related health outcomes. Representation across the socioeconomic spectrum and across culturally and linguistically diverse groups was limited. As only a limited number of studies met the inclusion criteria for this review, a need exists for rigorously designed interventions, standardised intervention approaches, with long-term follow-up, and the potential for scalability. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019123295.
Authors: Sherry L Pagoto; Kristin L Schneider; Jessica L Oleski; Juliana M Luciani; Jamie S Bodenlos; Matt C Whited Journal: Obesity (Silver Spring) Date: 2011-06-02 Impact factor: 5.002
Authors: Myles D Young; Robin Callister; Clare E Collins; Ronald C Plotnikoff; Elroy J Aguiar; Philip J Morgan Journal: Obesity (Silver Spring) Date: 2016-12-07 Impact factor: 5.002
Authors: Dominika Kwasnicka; Nikos Ntoumanis; Kate Hunt; Cindy M Gray; Robert U Newton; Daniel F Gucciardi; Cecilie Thøgersen-Ntoumani; Jenny L Olson; Joanne McVeigh; Deborah A Kerr; Sally Wyke; Philip J Morgan; Suzanne Robinson; Marshall Makate; Eleanor Quested Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2020-08-06 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Paul Sharp; John C Spence; Joan L Bottorff; John L Oliffe; Kate Hunt; Mathew Vis-Dunbar; Cristina M Caperchione Journal: Br J Sports Med Date: 2020-02-05 Impact factor: 13.800
Authors: Angela A Mulligan; Marleen A H Lentjes; Robert N Luben; Nicholas J Wareham; Kay-Tee Khaw Journal: BMC Cardiovasc Disord Date: 2019-10-28 Impact factor: 2.298