Design of the iPlay Study
- 429 Downloads
Health benefits of physical activity in children are well known. However, a drawback is the risk of physical activity-related injuries. Children are at particular risk for these injuries, because of a high level of exposure. Because of the high prevalence of physical activity injuries and the negative short- and long-term consequences, prevention of these injuries in children is important. This article describes how we systematically developed a school-based physical activity injury prevention programme using the intervention mapping (IM) protocol.
IM describes a process for developing theory- and evidence-based health promotion programmes. The development can be described in six steps: (i) perform a needs assessment; (ii) identify programme and performance objectives; (iii) select methods and strategies; (iv) develop programme; (v) adopt and implement; and (vi) evaluate.
First, the results of the needs assessment showed the injury problem in children and the different risk factors for physical activity injuries. Based on the results of the needs assessment the main focus of the injury prevention programme was described. Second, the overall programme objective of the injury prevention programme was defined as reducing the incidence of lower extremity physical activity injuries. Third, theoretical methods and practical strategies were selected to accomplish a decrease in injury incidence. The theoretical methods used were active learning, providing cues and scenariobased risk information, and active processing of information. The practical strategy of the injury prevention programme was an 8-month course about injury prevention to be used in physical education classes in primary schools. Fourth, programme materials that were used in the injury prevention programme were developed, including newsletters for children and parents, posters, exercises to improve motor fitness, and an information website. Fifth, an implementation plan was designed in order to ensure that the prevention programme would be implemented, adopted and sustained over time. Finally, an evaluation plan was designed. The injury prevention programme is being evaluated in a cluster randomized controlled trial with more than 2200 children from 40 primary schools throughout the Netherlands.
The IM process is a useful process for developing an injury prevention programme. Based on the steps of the IM we developed an 8-month injury prevention programme to be used in physical education classes of primary schools.
KeywordsPhysical Education Injury Prevention Focus Group Interview Intervention Mapping Physical Education Class
The iPlay study is supported by a grant from the Netherlands organization for health research and development (ZONMW), grant number 62200033. The authors have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this review.
- 2.Ekblom B, Astrand PO. Role of physical activity on health in children and adolescents. Act Paediatr 2000 Jul; 89 (7): 762–4Google Scholar
- 8.Backx FJG. Sports injuries in youth; etiology and prevention (thesis). Janus Jongbloed Research Center on Sports andHealth, the Netherlands. Utrecht: Rijksuniversiteit Utrecht, 1991Google Scholar
- 10.Bartholomew LK, Parcel GS, Kok G, et al. Intervention mapping: designing theory and evidence-based healthpromotion programs. Columbus (OH): McGraw-HillHigher Education, 2001Google Scholar
- 17.Hildebrandt VH, Ooijendijk WTM, Hopman-Rock M. Trendrapport: bewegen en gezondheid 2004-2005. Leiden:TNO Kwaliteit van Leven, 2007Google Scholar
- 18.SCP. Rapportage Sport 2006. The Hague: 2006Google Scholar
- 19.SCP. Rapportage jeugd 2002. Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau, Den Haag, 2003Google Scholar
- 20.Kahl H, Dortschy R, Ellsasser G. Injuries among children and adolescents (1-17 years) and implementation of safetymeasures: results of the nationwide German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Children and Adolescents (KiGGS). Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforsch Gesundheitsschutz 2007 May; 50 (5-6): 718–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.Toet H, Schoots W, den Hertog PC, et al. Kosten van sportblessures in Nederland. Amsterdam: Consument enVeiligheid, 2005Google Scholar
- 24.Bartholomew LK, Parcel GS, Kok G, et al. Planning health promotion programs, an intervention mapping approach. San Fransico (CA): Jossey-Bass, 2006Google Scholar
- 27.Machenbach J, van der Maas PJ. Volksgezondheid en gezondheidszorg. Maarsen: Elsevier Gezondheidszorg, 1999Google Scholar
- 28.Fishbein M, Ajzen I. Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: an introduction to theory and research. New York (NY): Wiley, 1975Google Scholar
- 29.Bandura A. Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs (NY): PrenticeHall, 1986Google Scholar
- 33.Emery CA, Cassidy D, Klassen TP. The effectiveness of a proprioceptive balance-training program in healthyadolescents: a cluster randomized controlled trial. Am J Epidemiol 2004; 159: 749–54Google Scholar
- 39.Brug J, Schaalma H, Kok G, et al. Gezondheidsvoorlichting en gedragsverandering, een planmatige aanpak. Assen: Van Gorcum, 2001Google Scholar
- 43.Miller PA, Binns HJ, Christoffel KK. Children’s bicycle helmet attitudes and use: association with parental rules. The Pediatric Practice Research Group. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 1996 Dec; 150 (12): 1259–64Google Scholar
- 44.Zahler L, Puhse U, Stussi C, et al. Active childhood-healthy life. Basle: Swiss Federal Office of Sports Magglinger(FOSPO); Institute for Exercise and Health Science, Universityof Basle, 2004Google Scholar
- 45.van Berkel M, Consten A, Danes H, et al. Basisdocument; bewegingsonderwijs. Zeist: Jan Luiting Fonds, 2004Google Scholar
- 46.Leyten C, Kemper H, Verschuur R. de MOPER hitheidstest: handleiding en prestatieschalen 9 t/m 11 jarigen. Haarlem: De Vrieseborch, 1982Google Scholar
- 47.Adam C, Klissouras V, Ravazzolo M, et al. Handbook for the EUROFIT test of Physical Fitness. Brussels: Council of Europe committee for the development of sport, 1998Google Scholar