Strategies for enhancing the implementation of school-based policies or practices targeting diet, physical activity, obesity, tobacco or alcohol use.

BACKGROUND: Several school-based interventions are effective in improving child diet and physical activity, and preventing excessive weight gain, and tobacco or harmful alcohol use. However, schools are frequently unsuccessful in implementing such evidence-based interventions. OBJECTIVES: 1. To evaluate the benefits and harms of strategies aiming to improve school implementation of interventions to address student diet, physical activity, tobacco or alcohol use, and obesity. 2. To evaluate the benefits and harms of strategies to improve intervention implementation on measures of student diet, physical activity, obesity, tobacco use or alcohol use; describe their cost or cost-effectiveness; and any harms of strategies on schools, school staff or students. SEARCH METHODS: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search was between 1 September 2016 and 30 April 2021 to identify any relevant trials published since the last published review. SELECTION CRITERIA: We defined 'Implementation' as the use of strategies to adopt and integrate evidence-based health interventions and to change practice patterns within specific settings. We included any trial (randomised controlled trial (RCT) or non-randomised controlled trial (non-RCT)) conducted at any scale, with a parallel control group that compared a strategy to implement policies or practices to address diet, physical activity, overweight or obesity, tobacco or alcohol use by students to 'no intervention', 'usual' practice or a different implementation strategy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Given the large number of outcomes reported, we selected and included the effects of a single outcome measure for each trial for the primary (implementation) and secondary (student health behaviour and obesity) outcomes using a decision hierarchy. Where possible, we calculated standardised mean differences (SMDs) to account for variable outcome measures with 95% confidence intervals (CI). For RCTs, we conducted meta-analyses of primary and secondary outcomes using a random-effects model, or in instances where there were between two and five studies, a fixed-effect model. The synthesis of the effects for non-randomised studies followed the 'Synthesis without meta-analysis' (SWiM) guidelines. MAIN RESULTS: We included an additional 11 trials in this update bringing the total number of included studies in the review to 38. Of these, 22 were conducted in the USA. Twenty-six studies used RCT designs. Seventeen trials tested strategies to implement healthy eating, 12 physical activity and six a combination of risk factors. Just one trial sought to increase the implementation of interventions to delay initiation or reduce the consumption of alcohol. All trials used multiple implementation strategies, the most common being educational materials, educational outreach and educational meetings. The overall certainty of evidence was low and ranged from very low to moderate for secondary review outcomes. Pooled analyses of RCTs found, relative to a control, the use of implementation strategies may result in a large increase in the implementation of interventions in schools (SMD 1.04, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.34; 22 RCTs, 1917 participants; low-certainty evidence). For secondary outcomes we found, relative to control, the use of implementation strategies to support intervention implementation may result in a slight improvement on measures of student diet (SMD 0.08, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.15; 11 RCTs, 16,649 participants; low-certainty evidence) and physical activity (SMD 0.09, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.19; 9 RCTs, 16,389 participants; low-certainty evidence). The effects on obesity probably suggest little to no difference (SMD -0.02, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.02; 8 RCTs, 18,618 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The effects on tobacco use are very uncertain (SMD -0.03, 95% CIs -0.23 to 0.18; 3 RCTs, 3635 participants; very low-certainty evidence). One RCT assessed measures of student alcohol use and found strategies to support implementation may result in a slight increase in use (odds ratio 1.10, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.56; P = 0.60; 2105 participants). Few trials reported the economic evaluations of implementation strategies, the methods of which were heterogeneous and evidence graded as very uncertain. A lack of consistent terminology describing implementation strategies was an important limitation of the review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The use of implementation strategies may result in large increases in implementation of interventions, and slight improvements in measures of student diet, and physical activity. Further research is required to assess the impact of implementation strategies on such behavioural- and obesity-related outcomes, including on measures of alcohol use, where the findings of one trial suggest it may slightly increase student risk. Given the low certainty of the available evidence for most measures further research is required to guide efforts to facilitate the translation of evidence into practice in this setting.

Strategies for enhancing the implementation of school-based policies or practices targeting risk factors for chronic disease.

BACKGROUND: A number of school-based policies or practices have been found to be effective in improving child diet and physical activity, and preventing excessive weight gain, tobacco or harmful alcohol use. Schools, however, frequently fail to implement such evidence-based interventions. OBJECTIVES: The primary aims of the review are to examine the effectiveness of strategies aiming to improve the implementation of school-based policies, programs or practices to address child diet, physical activity, obesity, tobacco or alcohol use.Secondary objectives of the review are to: Examine the effectiveness of implementation strategies on health behaviour (e.g. fruit and vegetable consumption) and anthropometric outcomes (e.g. BMI, weight); describe the impact of such strategies on the knowledge, skills or attitudes of school staff involved in implementing health-promoting policies, programs or practices; describe the cost or cost-effectiveness of such strategies; and describe any unintended adverse effects of strategies on schools, school staff or children. SEARCH METHODS: All electronic databases were searched on 16 July 2017 for studies published up to 31 August 2016. We searched the following electronic databases: Cochrane Library including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations; Embase Classic and Embase; PsycINFO; Education Resource Information Center (ERIC); Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL); Dissertations and Theses; and SCOPUS. We screened reference lists of all included trials for citations of other potentially relevant trials. We handsearched all publications between 2011 and 2016 in two specialty journals (Implementation Science and Journal of Translational Behavioral Medicine) and conducted searches of the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (http://apps.who.int/trialsearch/) as well as the US National Institutes of Health registry (https://clinicaltrials.gov). We consulted with experts in the field to identify other relevant research. SELECTION CRITERIA: 'Implementation' was defined as the use of strategies to adopt and integrate evidence-based health interventions and to change practice patterns within specific settings. We included any trial (randomised or non-randomised) conducted at any scale, with a parallel control group that compared a strategy to implement policies or practices to address diet, physical activity, overweight or obesity, tobacco or alcohol use by school staff to 'no intervention', 'usual' practice or a different implementation strategy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Citation screening, data extraction and assessment of risk of bias was performed by review authors in pairs. Disagreements between review authors were resolved via consensus, or if required, by a third author. Considerable trial heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis. We narratively synthesised trial findings by describing the effect size of the primary outcome measure for policy or practice implementation (or the median of such measures where a single primary outcome was not stated). MAIN RESULTS: We included 27 trials, 18 of which were conducted in the USA. Nineteen studies employed randomised controlled trial (RCT) designs. Fifteen trials tested strategies to implement healthy eating policies, practice or programs; six trials tested strategies targeting physical activity policies or practices; and three trials targeted tobacco policies or practices. Three trials targeted a combination of risk factors. None of the included trials sought to increase the implementation of interventions to delay initiation or reduce the consumption of alcohol. All trials examined multi-strategic implementation strategies and no two trials examined the same combinations of implementation strategies. The most common implementation strategies included educational materials, educational outreach and educational meetings. For all outcomes, the overall quality of evidence was very low and the risk of bias was high for the majority of trials for detection and performance bias.Among 13 trials reporting dichotomous implementation outcomes-the proportion of schools or school staff (e.g. classes) implementing a targeted policy or practice-the median unadjusted (improvement) effect sizes ranged from 8.5% to 66.6%. Of seven trials reporting the percentage of a practice, program or policy that had been implemented, the median unadjusted effect (improvement), relative to the control ranged from -8% to 43%. The effect, relative to control, reported in two trials assessing the impact of implementation strategies on the time per week teachers spent delivering targeted policies or practices ranged from 26.6 to 54.9 minutes per week. Among trials reporting other continuous implementation outcomes, findings were mixed. Four trials were conducted of strategies that sought to achieve implementation 'at scale', that is, across samples of at least 50 schools, of which improvements in implementation were reported in three trials.The impact of interventions on student health behaviour or weight status were mixed. Three of the eight trials with physical activity outcomes reported no significant improvements. Two trials reported reductions in tobacco use among intervention relative to control. Seven of nine trials reported no between-group differences on student overweight, obesity or adiposity. Positive improvements in child dietary intake were generally reported among trials reporting these outcomes. Three trials assessed the impact of implementation strategies on the attitudes of school staff and found mixed effects. Two trials specified in the study methods an assessment of potential unintended adverse effects, of which, they reported none. One trial reported implementation support did not significantly increase school revenue or expenses and another, conducted a formal economic evaluation, reporting the intervention to be cost-effective. Trial heterogeneity, and the lack of consistent terminology describing implementation strategies, were important limitations of the review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Given the very low quality of the available evidence, it is uncertain whether the strategies tested improve implementation of the targeted school-based policies or practices, student health behaviours, or the knowledge or attitudes of school staff. It is also uncertain if strategies to improve implementation are cost-effective or if they result in unintended adverse consequences. Further research is required to guide efforts to facilitate the translation of evidence into practice in this setting.

An RCT to Facilitate Implementation of School Practices Known to Increase Physical Activity.

INTRODUCTION: Although comprehensive school-based physical activity interventions are efficacious when tested under research conditions, they often require adaptation in order for implementation at scale. This paper reports the effectiveness of an adapted efficacious school-based intervention in improving children's moderate to vigorous physical activity. The impact of strategies to support program implementation was also assessed. DESIGN: A cluster RCT of low socioeconomic elementary schools in New South Wales, Australia. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Consenting schools were randomized (25 intervention, 21 control) using a computerized random number function. Follow-up measures were taken at 6 months post-randomization (May-August 2015) by blinded research assistants. The multicomponent school-based intervention, based on an efficacious school-based physical activity program (Supporting Children's Outcomes using Rewards, Exercise and Skills), consisted of four physical activity strategies and seven implementation support strategies. The intervention was adapted for scalability and delivery by a local health service over 6 months. The primary outcome was accelerometer assessed, student mean daily minutes spent in moderate to vigorous physical activity. Physical education lesson quality and other school physical activity practices were also assessed. RESULTS: Participants (n=1,139, 49% male) were third- through sixth-grade students at follow-up (May-August 2015). Valid wear time and analysis of data were provided for 989 (86%) participants (571 intervention, 568 control). At 6-month follow-up, there were no significant effects in overall daily minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity between groups (1.96 minutes, 95% CI= -3.49, 7.41, p=0.48). However, adjusted difference in mean minutes of overall vigorous physical activity (2.19, 95% CI=0.06, 4.32, p=0.04); mean minutes of school day moderate to vigorous physical activity (2.90, 95% CI=0.06, 5.85, p=0.05); and mean minutes of school day vigorous physical activity (1.81, 95% CI=0.78, 2.83, p≤0.01) were significantly different in favor of the intervention group. Physical education lesson quality and school physical activity practices were significantly different favoring the intervention group (analyzed October 2015-January 2016). CONCLUSIONS: The modified intervention was not effective in increasing children's overall daily minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity, when adapted for implementation at scale. However, the intervention did improve daily minutes of vigorous physical activity and school day moderate to vigorous physical activity, lesson quality, and school physical activity practices. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12615000437561.

Assessment of the School Nutrition Environment: A Study in Australian Primary School Canteens.

INTRODUCTION: Schools represent a valuable setting for interventions to improve children's diets, as they offer structured opportunities for ongoing intervention. Modifications to the school food environment can increase purchasing of healthier foods and improve children's diets. This study examines the availability of healthy food and drinks, implementation of pricing and promotion strategies in Australian primary school canteens, and whether these varied by school characteristics. METHODS: In 2012 and 2013, canteen managers of primary schools in the Hunter New England region of New South Wales reported via telephone interview the pricing and promotion strategies implemented in their canteens to encourage healthier food and drink purchases. A standardized audit of canteen menus was performed to assess the availability of healthy options. Data were analyzed in 2014. RESULTS: Overall, 203 (79%) canteen managers completed the telephone interview and 170 provided menus. Twenty-nine percent of schools had menus that primarily consisted of healthier food and drinks, and 11% did not sell unhealthy foods. Less than half reported including only healthy foods in meal deals (25%), labeling menus (43%), and having a comprehensive canteen policy (22%). A significantly larger proportion of schools in high socioeconomic areas (OR=3.0) and large schools (OR=4.4) had primarily healthy options on their menus. School size and being a Government school were significantly associated with implementation of some pricing and promotion strategies. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need to monitor canteen environments to inform policy development and research. Future implementation research to improve the food environments of disadvantaged schools in particular is warranted.