This study aimed to test the effectiveness of the Whole of Systems Trial of Prevention Strategies for Childhood Obesity (WHO STOPS Childhood Obesity) for behavioral, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and BMI outcomes. Methods: This was a cluster randomized trial of 10 communities randomly allocated (1:1) to start intervention in 2015 (step 1) or in 2019 (after 4 years) in South West Victoria, Australia. Data were collected from participating primary schools in April to June of 2015 (73% school participation rate), 2017 (69%), and 2019 (63%). Student participation rates were 80% in 2015 (1,792/2,516 invited), 81% in 2017 (2,411/2,963), and 79% in 2019 (2,177/2,720). Repeat cross-sectional analyses of measured height and weight (grades two, four, and six [aged approximately 7 to 12 years]), self-reported behavior, and HRQoL (grades four and six) were conducted. Results: There was an intervention by time interaction in BMI z scores (P = 0.031) and obesity/overweight prevalence (P = 0.006). BMI z score and overweight/obesity prevalence decreased between 2015 and 2017 and increased between 2017 and 2019 in intervention communities. The intervention significantly reduced takeaway food consumption (P = 0.034) and improved physical (P = 0.019), psychosocial (P = 0.026), and global (P = 0.012) HRQoL. Water consumption increased among girls (P = 0.033) in the intervention communities, as did energy-dense, nutrient-poor snack consumption among boys (P = 0.006). Conclusions: WHO STOPS had a positive impact on takeaway food intake and HRQoL.
IntroductionPrevention of overweight and obesity in childhood is a priority because of associated acute and chronic conditions in childhood and later in life, which place significant burden on health systems. Evidence suggests prevention should engage a range of actions and actors and target multiple levels. The Whole of Systems Trial Of Prevention Strategies for childhood obesity (WHO STOPS) will evaluate the outcomes of a novel systems-based intervention that aims to engage whole communities in a locally led multifaceted response. This paper describes the planned economic evaluation of WHO STOPS and examines the methodological challenges for economic evaluation of a complex systems-based intervention.Methods and analysisEconomic evaluation alongside a stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial in regional and rural communities in Victoria, Australia. Cost-effectiveness and cost–utility analyses will provide estimates of the incremental cost (in $A) per body mass index unit saved and quality adjusted life year gained. A Markov cohort model will be employed to estimate healthcare cost savings and benefits over the life course of children. The dollar value of community resources harnessed for the community-led response will be estimated. Probabilistic uncertainty analyses will be undertaken to test sensitivity of results to plausible variations in all trial-based and modelled variables. WHO STOPS will also be assessed against other implementation considerations (such as sustainability and acceptability to communities and other stakeholders).Ethics and disseminationThe trial is registered by the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12616000980437). Full ethics clearances have been received for all methods described below: Deakin University’s Human Research Ethics Committee 2014-279, Deakin University’s Human Ethics Advisory Group-Health (HEAG-H) HEAG-H 194_2014, HEAG-H 17 2015, HEAG-H 155_2014, HEAG-H 197_2016, HEAG-H 118_2017, the Victorian Department of Education and Training 2015_002622 and the Catholic Archdiocese of Ballarat. Trial findings (including economic evaluation) will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at international conferences. Collected data and analyses will be made available in accordance with journal policies and study ethics approvals. Results will be presented to relevant government authorities with an interest in cost-effectiveness of these types of interventions.Trial registration numberACTRN12616000980437; Pre-results.
ObjectivesTo explore whether the physical activity (PA) environment (walkability, greenspace and recreational facilities) surrounding regional primary schools is associated with children’s PA levels, active transport and weight status. Limited research on this topic has been conducted outside of major cities.DesignCross-sectional ecological study using baseline data from two large-scale obesity prevention interventions.SettingEighty (n=80) primary schools across two regional areas in Victoria, Australia.ParticipantsStudents aged 8–13 years (n=2144) attending participating primary schools.Outcome measuresMeasured weight status (body mass index z-score, proportion overweight/obese) and self-reported PA behaviours (meeting PA recommendations and active travel behaviour).ResultsWhen adjusted for student and school demographics, students had significantly increased odds of using active transport to or from school when the school neighbourhood was more walkable (OR 1.21 (95% CI 1.09 to 1.35), had a greater number of greenspaces (OR 1.35 (95% CI 1.20 to 1.53)) and a greater number of recreational facilities (OR 1.18 (95% CI 1.07 to 1.31)). A higher cumulative PA environment score was also associated with a higher proportion of children using active transport (OR 1.33 (95% CI 1.28 to 1.51)). There were no significant associations between the PA environment measures and either weight status or meeting the PA recommendations in adjusted models.ConclusionsThis study is the first of its kind exploring school neighbourhood environments and child weight status and PA in regional areas of Australia. It highlights the potential of the environment surrounding primary schools in contributing to students’ active travel to and from school. Further research with the use of objective PA measurement is warranted in regional areas that have been under-researched.Trial registration numberAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR.org.au) identifier 12616000980437; Results.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.