Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/10135
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorFox-Rushby, J-
dc.contributor.authorNormansell, R-
dc.contributor.authorVictor, C-
dc.contributor.authorSmith, J-
dc.contributor.authorCook, DG-
dc.contributor.authorKerry, S-
dc.contributor.authorIliffe, S-
dc.contributor.authorUssher, S-
dc.contributor.authorWhincup, P-
dc.contributor.authorHarris, T-
dc.date.accessioned2015-02-06T10:42:29Z-
dc.date.available2015-02-06T10:42:29Z-
dc.date.issued2014-
dc.identifier.citationBMC Public Health, 14:1272, 2014en_US
dc.identifier.issn1471-2458-
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/14/1272-
dc.identifier.urihttp://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/10135-
dc.descriptionThis article has been made available through the Brunel Open Access Publishing Fund.-
dc.description.abstractBackground: The majority of mid-life and older adults in the UK are not achieving recommended physical activity levels and inactivity is associated with many health problems. Walking is a safe, appropriate exercise. The PACE-UP trial sought to increase walking through the structured use of a pedometer and handbook, with and without support from a practice nurse trained in behaviour change techniques (BCTs). Understanding barriers and facilitators to engagement with a primary care based physical activity intervention is essential for future trials and programmes. Methods: We conducted semi-structured telephone interviews usi ng a topic guide with purposive samples of participants who did and did not increase their walking from both intervent ion groups. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and coded independently by researchers pr ior to performing a thematic analysis. R esponsiveness to the specific BCTs used was also analysed. Results: Forty-three trial participants were interviewed in early 20 14. Almost all felt they had benefitted, irrespective of their change in step-count, and that primary care was an appropriate setting. Important facilitators included a desire for a healthy lifesty le, improved physical health, enjoyment of walking in the local environment, having a flexible routine allowing for an increase in walking, appropriate self and external monitoring and support from others. Important barriers included physical hea lth problems, an inflexible routine, work and other commitments, the weather and a mistrust of the monitoring equipment. BCTs that were reported to have the most impact included: prov iding information about behaviour-health link; prompting self-monitoring and review of goals and outcomes; providing feedback; providing specific information about how to increase walking; planning social support/change; and relapse prevention. Rewards were unhelpful. Conclusions: Despite our expectation that there would be a diff erence between the experiences of those who did and did not objectively increase their walking, we found that mos t participants considered themselves to have succeeded in the trial and benefitted from taking part. Barriers and faci litators were similar across demographic groups and trial outcomes. Findings indicated several BCTs on which PA tr ial and programme planners could focus efforts with the expectation of greatest impact as well as strong s upport for primary care as an appropriate venue. Trial registration: ISRCTN98538934.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherBMC Public Healthen_US
dc.subjectQualitative researchen_US
dc.subjectPhysical activityen_US
dc.subjectPedometer interventionen_US
dc.subjectWalkingen_US
dc.subjectPrimary careen_US
dc.subjectOlder adultsen_US
dc.titleNumbers are not the whole story: a qualitative exploration of barriers and facilitators to increased physical activity in the PACE-UP randomised controlled trial, a primary care based walking interventionen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-14-1272-
dc.relation.isPartOfBMC Public Health-
dc.relation.isPartOfBMC Public Health-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/Brunel Staff by College/Department/Division-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/Brunel Staff by College/Department/Division/College of Health and Life Sciences-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/Brunel Staff by College/Department/Division/College of Health and Life Sciences/Dept of Clinical Sciences-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/Brunel Staff by College/Department/Division/College of Health and Life Sciences/Dept of Clinical Sciences/Community Health and Public Health-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/Brunel Staff by College/Department/Division/College of Health and Life Sciences/Dept of Life Sciences-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/Brunel Staff by College/Department/Division/College of Health and Life Sciences/Dept of Life Sciences/Biological Sciences-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/Brunel Staff by Institute/Theme-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/Brunel Staff by Institute/Theme/Institute of Environmental, Health and Societies-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/Brunel Staff by Institute/Theme/Institute of Environmental, Health and Societies/Health Economics-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/Brunel Staff by Institute/Theme/Institute of Environmental, Health and Societies/Healthy Ageing-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/Specialist Centres-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/Specialist Centres/HERG-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/University Research Centres and Groups-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/University Research Centres and Groups/School of Health Sciences and Social Care - URCs and Groups-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/University Research Centres and Groups/School of Health Sciences and Social Care - URCs and Groups/Brunel Institute for Ageing Studies-
Appears in Collections:Brunel OA Publishing Fund
Health Economics Research Group (HERG)

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Fulltext.pdf319.46 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in BURA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.