The feasibility and RE-AIM evaluation of the TAME health pilot study

Abstract Background Conducting 5 A’s counseling in clinic and utilizing technology-based resources are recommended to promote physical activity but little is known about how to implement such an intervention. This investigation aimed to determine the feasibility and acceptability, using the RE-AIM (...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Zakkoyya H Lewis, Kenneth J Ottenbacher, Steve R Fisher, Kristofer Jennings, Arleen F Brown, Maria C Swartz, Eloisa Martinez, Elizabeth J Lyons
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2017-08-01
Series:International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
Subjects:
Online Access:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12966-017-0560-5
id doaj-442742e2205945fcaab0626ab201efb2
record_format Article
spelling doaj-442742e2205945fcaab0626ab201efb22020-11-25T00:15:18ZengBMCInternational Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity1479-58682017-08-0114111510.1186/s12966-017-0560-5The feasibility and RE-AIM evaluation of the TAME health pilot studyZakkoyya H Lewis0Kenneth J Ottenbacher1Steve R Fisher2Kristofer Jennings3Arleen F Brown4Maria C Swartz5Eloisa Martinez6Elizabeth J Lyons7University of Texas Medical BranchUniversity of Texas Medical BranchUniversity of Texas Medical BranchUniversity of Texas Medical BranchUniversity of California Los AngelesUniversity of Texas Medical BranchUniversity of Texas Medical BranchUniversity of Texas Medical BranchAbstract Background Conducting 5 A’s counseling in clinic and utilizing technology-based resources are recommended to promote physical activity but little is known about how to implement such an intervention. This investigation aimed to determine the feasibility and acceptability, using the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) framework, of a pragmatic, primary care-based intervention that incorporated 5 A’s counseling and self-control through an activity monitor. Methods Primary care patients (n = 40) 55–74 years of age were recruited and randomized to receive a pedometer or an electronic activity monitor (EAM), Jawbone UP24, to monitor activity for 12 weeks. Participants were also invited to a focus group after completing the intervention. Stakeholders (n = 36) were recruited to provide feedback. Results The intervention recruitment rate was 24.7%. The attrition rate was 20% with a significantly higher rate for the pedometer group (p = 0.02). The EAM group increased their minutes of physical activity by 11.1 min/day while the pedometer maintained their activity (0.2 min/day), with no significant group difference. EAM participants liked using their monitor and would continue wearing it while the pedometer group was neutral to these statements (p < 0.05). Over the 12 weeks there were 490 comments and 1094 “likes” given to study peers in the corresponding application for the UP24 monitor. Some EAM participants enjoyed the social interaction feature while others were uncomfortable talking to strangers. Participants stated they would want counseling from a counselor and not their physician or a nurse. Other notable comments included incorporating multiple health behaviors, more in-person counseling with a counselor, and having a funding source for sustainability. Conclusions Overall, the study was well-received but the results raise a number of considerations. Practitioners, counselors, and researchers should consider the following before implementing a similar intervention: 1) utilize PA counselors, 2) target multiple health behaviors, 3) form a social support group, 4) identify a funding source for sustainability, and 5) be mindful of concerns with technology. Trial registration clinicaltrials.gov- NCT02554435 . Registered 24 August 2015.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12966-017-0560-5Physical activityTechnologyPrimary careActivity monitorOlder adultsRE-AIM
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Zakkoyya H Lewis
Kenneth J Ottenbacher
Steve R Fisher
Kristofer Jennings
Arleen F Brown
Maria C Swartz
Eloisa Martinez
Elizabeth J Lyons
spellingShingle Zakkoyya H Lewis
Kenneth J Ottenbacher
Steve R Fisher
Kristofer Jennings
Arleen F Brown
Maria C Swartz
Eloisa Martinez
Elizabeth J Lyons
The feasibility and RE-AIM evaluation of the TAME health pilot study
International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
Physical activity
Technology
Primary care
Activity monitor
Older adults
RE-AIM
author_facet Zakkoyya H Lewis
Kenneth J Ottenbacher
Steve R Fisher
Kristofer Jennings
Arleen F Brown
Maria C Swartz
Eloisa Martinez
Elizabeth J Lyons
author_sort Zakkoyya H Lewis
title The feasibility and RE-AIM evaluation of the TAME health pilot study
title_short The feasibility and RE-AIM evaluation of the TAME health pilot study
title_full The feasibility and RE-AIM evaluation of the TAME health pilot study
title_fullStr The feasibility and RE-AIM evaluation of the TAME health pilot study
title_full_unstemmed The feasibility and RE-AIM evaluation of the TAME health pilot study
title_sort feasibility and re-aim evaluation of the tame health pilot study
publisher BMC
series International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
issn 1479-5868
publishDate 2017-08-01
description Abstract Background Conducting 5 A’s counseling in clinic and utilizing technology-based resources are recommended to promote physical activity but little is known about how to implement such an intervention. This investigation aimed to determine the feasibility and acceptability, using the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) framework, of a pragmatic, primary care-based intervention that incorporated 5 A’s counseling and self-control through an activity monitor. Methods Primary care patients (n = 40) 55–74 years of age were recruited and randomized to receive a pedometer or an electronic activity monitor (EAM), Jawbone UP24, to monitor activity for 12 weeks. Participants were also invited to a focus group after completing the intervention. Stakeholders (n = 36) were recruited to provide feedback. Results The intervention recruitment rate was 24.7%. The attrition rate was 20% with a significantly higher rate for the pedometer group (p = 0.02). The EAM group increased their minutes of physical activity by 11.1 min/day while the pedometer maintained their activity (0.2 min/day), with no significant group difference. EAM participants liked using their monitor and would continue wearing it while the pedometer group was neutral to these statements (p < 0.05). Over the 12 weeks there were 490 comments and 1094 “likes” given to study peers in the corresponding application for the UP24 monitor. Some EAM participants enjoyed the social interaction feature while others were uncomfortable talking to strangers. Participants stated they would want counseling from a counselor and not their physician or a nurse. Other notable comments included incorporating multiple health behaviors, more in-person counseling with a counselor, and having a funding source for sustainability. Conclusions Overall, the study was well-received but the results raise a number of considerations. Practitioners, counselors, and researchers should consider the following before implementing a similar intervention: 1) utilize PA counselors, 2) target multiple health behaviors, 3) form a social support group, 4) identify a funding source for sustainability, and 5) be mindful of concerns with technology. Trial registration clinicaltrials.gov- NCT02554435 . Registered 24 August 2015.
topic Physical activity
Technology
Primary care
Activity monitor
Older adults
RE-AIM
url http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12966-017-0560-5
work_keys_str_mv AT zakkoyyahlewis thefeasibilityandreaimevaluationofthetamehealthpilotstudy
AT kennethjottenbacher thefeasibilityandreaimevaluationofthetamehealthpilotstudy
AT steverfisher thefeasibilityandreaimevaluationofthetamehealthpilotstudy
AT kristoferjennings thefeasibilityandreaimevaluationofthetamehealthpilotstudy
AT arleenfbrown thefeasibilityandreaimevaluationofthetamehealthpilotstudy
AT mariacswartz thefeasibilityandreaimevaluationofthetamehealthpilotstudy
AT eloisamartinez thefeasibilityandreaimevaluationofthetamehealthpilotstudy
AT elizabethjlyons thefeasibilityandreaimevaluationofthetamehealthpilotstudy
AT zakkoyyahlewis feasibilityandreaimevaluationofthetamehealthpilotstudy
AT kennethjottenbacher feasibilityandreaimevaluationofthetamehealthpilotstudy
AT steverfisher feasibilityandreaimevaluationofthetamehealthpilotstudy
AT kristoferjennings feasibilityandreaimevaluationofthetamehealthpilotstudy
AT arleenfbrown feasibilityandreaimevaluationofthetamehealthpilotstudy
AT mariacswartz feasibilityandreaimevaluationofthetamehealthpilotstudy
AT eloisamartinez feasibilityandreaimevaluationofthetamehealthpilotstudy
AT elizabethjlyons feasibilityandreaimevaluationofthetamehealthpilotstudy
_version_ 1725387706720059392