Controlled trial of an mHealth intervention to promote healthy behaviours in adolescence (TeenPower): Effectiveness analysis

Abstract

Aim To evaluate the effectiveness on lifestyle change of an mHealth intervention to promote healthy behaviours in adolescence (TeenPower) and to analyse the predictors of the mHealth intervention effectiveness. Design This study is designed as a non‐randomized controlled trial with a two‐arm structure. Methods Adolescents of 12–16‐year old were recruited from three school districts, with access to the Internet and smartphone/tablet devices. The intervention group was invited to engage in the mHealth intervention (TeenPower) for 6 months in addition to a school‐based intervention. The control group only followed the school‐based intervention. A repeated measures factorial ANOVA was used and the main effectiveness outcome was the lifestyle change measured by the adolescent lifestyle profile. Results The outcomes of the mHealth intervention (TeenPower) show a significant effect on nutrition (ƞ2p = 0.03, p = .03), positive life perspective (ƞ2p = 0.04, p = .01), and global lifestyle (ƞ2p = 0.02, p = .05), with a dropout rate of 62.1%. The analysis of the effectiveness predictors of the mHealth intervention suggested that older adolescents tended to show a significant increase in the rates of stress management (r = .40; p < .05). Conclusions Although the considerable dropout rate, the mHealth intervention presented significant impact on multiple lifestyle domains, providing support for the effectiveness of mHealth interventions for health promotion as an add‐on to standard interdisciplinary interventions. Impact Adolescents must have the necessary and appropriate knowledge for the correct and responsible decision‐making regarding their health and lifestyle. Innovative strategies (mHealth intervention) were used to promote healthy behaviours. This study evaluates the effectiveness of an mHealth intervention (TeenPower) specifically designed for adolescents. We found a significant impact in several lifestyle domains such as health responsibility, nutrition, positive life perspective, and global lifestyle.

The impact of, and views on, school food intervention and policy in young people aged 11–18 years in Europe: A mixed methods systematic review

“…Although there is a growing body of evidence demonstrating a link between dietary intake and the potential to improve psychosocial outcomes, 74–76 in this review, only three studies examined wellbeing outcomes 39–41 . Although the findings demonstrated limited overall effectiveness, in general, studies were not powered to assess wellbeing.…”

“…All 13 studies investigated the effectiveness of school‐based interventions/programmes on nutrition outcomes: nutrition knowledge ( n = 4), 40,41,57,68 food choice competencies or dietary habits ( n = 9), 39,56–61,63 nutrient intake ( n = 1), 23 FV intake ( n = 6), 39,41,58,60,62,68 sugar consumption in the form of SSB and/or confectionary ( n = 3), 56,60,62 healthy snack consumption ( n = 3) 60,62,68 and breakfast frequency ( n = 3) 39,56,58 …”

“…Nutrition behaviour and dietary change were examined in eight of the observational studies 40,41,56–60,68 . Sahingoz et al 57 examined scores from the Mediterranean Diet Quality Index (KIDMED) assessment, providing an indication of dietary quality, which significantly ( p < 0.05) improved after an 18‐week intervention compared with control.…”

“…Three of the observational studies measured wellbeing outcomes 39–41 . The COPE teen programme in Turkey measured anxiety and depression using the Beck Inventory 70 and reported no significant change for depression, although anxiety decreased at 12 months follow up in the intervention group 41 .…”

Understanding how gamification influences consumers’ dietary preferences

“…Studies into the use of gamification for obesity and weight control are generally related to training or education (Sousa et al , 2019a, 2019b; Holzmann et al , 2019; Azevedo et al , 2019; Belogianni et al , 2019; Dassen et al , 2018; Van Lippevelde et al , 2016; González et al , 2016; Block et al , 2015) and physical activities (Hammedi et al , 2017; Patel et al , 2019; Edney et al , 2019; Fortunato et al , 2019; Sanders et al , 2019; Fang et al , 2019; Ahn et al , 2019; Harrison et al , 2019; Kurtzman et al , 2018; Mitchell et al , 2017; Van Mierlo et al , 2016) or both (Sanders et al , 2019; Timpel et al , 2018; Knight et al , 2018) and most of the studies use self-monitoring. Besides these, studies suggesting that gamification can actively encourage healthy dietary preferences are limited and are mostly associated with healthy nutrition education, ignoring external factors (such as promotion) that affect healthy dietary preferences.…”