Sedentary behaviour in primary school children

Abstract

Introduction

Spending much of the day sedentary carries an increased risk to health even if the recommended levels of physical activity (PA) are achieved (Brug & Chinapaw, 2015). Furthermore, uninterrupted sedentary time (ST) is increasingly recognised as a distinct health risk behaviour (Healy et al., 2011). Most primary school children spend approximately 6 hours per day at school (Rush et al., 2012) with most of this time (65%) being sedentary (van Stralen et al., 2013). Consequently, the aim of this thesis was to develop a school-based intervention aimed at interrupting and reducing sedentary behaviour (SB) in primary school children.

Methods

Phase 1 involved a systematic review of school-basedinterventions aimed at reducing objectively measured SB in primary schoolchildren. Phase 2 assessed SB in primary school children, their teachers andthe children’s parents. It also investigated the predictors and determinants ofchildren’s SB. This led to Phase 3 which was a focus group inquiry with primaryschool teachers to investigate influences on and barriers to interrupting andreducing children’s SB. This phase used the Behaviour Change Wheel and COM-BModel to explore the teachers’ capability, opportunity and motivation to interruptingand reducing children’s SB. Focus groups involving 12 teachers were conductedin two schools. The findings then informed Phase 4 which was the design anddelivery of a school-based, teacher-led, behaviour change intervention aimed atinterrupting and reducing v children’s SB. Finally, Phase 5 tested thefeasibility of this intervention to help interrupt and reduce SB within theprimary school setting. 

Results

Phase 1 yielded 1,376 studies. From this, eleven papersreporting eight studies were reviewed. Findings suggested that multi-componentsinterventions which include the use of standing desks may have a small effectin reducing objectively measured ST in the school setting. Phase 2 providedevidence that the primary school children accumulated large volumes of sitting(9.6 h.day-1 ) and the wide range of results highlighted the complex nature ofthe influences on child sedentary time. Phase 3 showed the teachers’capability, opportunity and motivation to interrupting and reducing children’sSB by examining influences on and strategies suggested by teachers. Examples ofinfluences on child SB ranged from external (education policy, funding, largeclass sizes) to individual (age, gender, personal preferences). Strategies toreduce child SB ranged from restructuring lesson plans and homework to improvedschool funding for additional play equipment. This knowledge led to Phase 4which successfully demonstrated the use of the BCW in the design and deliveryof a school-based, teacher-led, behaviour change intervention aimed atinterrupting and reducing children’s objectively measured ST. Finally, in Phase5, two teachers were provided with a toolkit of ten teaching activities for useduring the school day and an additional ten homework activities. These activitiesaimed to replace ST with PA.

Date of Award	Jun 2019
Original language	English
Supervisor	Marie Murphy (Supervisor) & Karen Kirby (Supervisor)