A page from the OpenDepot.org service

Jump to the start of the main contents

James, DVB Report on the evaluation of the South Staffordshire Physical Activity Care Pathway pilot (short version). Project Report. University of Gloucestershire.

[img] PDF (Report)
Download (543Kb)

    Abstract

    Executive Summary The South Staffordshire Physical Activity Care Pathway (SS PACP) is a ‘pilot’ pathway that builds on the experience of the ‘London’ pilot, but was intended to differ in two key regards. Firstly, the SS PACP draws on Lifestyle Advisors (Health Trainers) to deliver the brief intervention stage of the pathway, and secondly, the SS PACP is being implemented in an area with a lower proportion of the population drawn from urban areas. Further fundamental differences were introduced during the development of the SS PACP, including a recruitment method that was not targeted at any particular group, and no screening via physical activity index (PAI) scores. Although 623 patients completed an enhanced general practice physical activity questionnaire (GP PAQ), only 124 (i.e., 20%) indicated that they should be contacted by the lifestyle advisors. Interestingly, compared with those not requesting contact, those requesting contact were significantly more likely to have a high body mass index (BMI) and a low physical activity index (PAI). It was revealed that a lack of information at the point of completing the GP PAQ may have deterred a considerable number of patients from requesting contact from the lifestyle team. In addition, it appeared likely that investment in positive information emphasising the variety of physical activity opportunities and approaches, provided at the point of completing the GP PAQ, would offset preconceptions about potential barriers and align with common preferences. The provision of an adequate variety of physical activity opportunities and approaches would require ‘start-up’ investment, but the approach should become sustainable with increasing volume of patients progressing through the pathway. The cost of delivering the pathway is modest, so further investment would seem appropriate. Further investment in training to ensure greater ‘buy-in’ and familiarity with the pathway, along with enhanced communication systems between key stakeholders, should be a priority. Given the way in which this pilot PACP unfolded, it was evident at an early stage that this evaluation would have to focus on the ‘upstream’ factors and experiences at the initial stages of the pathway. As a result, further evaluation is required of the delivery stage, and the efficacy of the brief intervention in changing behaviour over the long-term.

    Item Type: Monograph (Project Report)
    Subjects: Subjects allied to Medicine
    Divisions: UNSPECIFIED
    Depositing User: Prof David James
    Date Deposited: 22 Jan 2011 17:01
    Last Modified: 22 Jan 2011 17:01
    URI: http://opendepot.org/id/eprint/393

    Actions (login required)

    View Item