Educational intervention targeting parents of children with overweight and obesity. Nutritional, Metabolic, Endocrine Overweight, obesity
Conditions
Interventions
Eight 90-minute group-based education sessions were delivered to parents of children with overweight/obesity over the course of 13 weeks (September 18 to December 11, 2017). The program also included
one of which was offered 3-months post-intervention (March 2018) and one of which will be offered 6-months post-intervention (June 2018). The formal 13-week intervention took place at a local YMCA fac
2004) as a guide, as well as evidence-based strategies grounded in motivational interviewing (Miller & Rollick, 1991) and group dynamics (Carron & Burke, 2005
Forsyth, 2014
Martin et al., 2009). A number of health professionals, experts, and members from community organizations (e.g. Canadian Obesity
Sponsors
The Office of Human Research Ethics
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
All
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: 1. Parent of a child aged 6-14 years with BMI =85th percentile for age and sex (calculated using the CDC BMI Percentile Calculator for Child and Teens; https://nccd.cdc.gov/dnpabmi/Calculator.aspx) 2. At least one parent agreed to take part in the study 3. Both the child and his/her parent(s) were able to speak, read, and understand English
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: 1. Child did not have a BMI =85th percentile for age and sex 2. Parents and children did not provide consent and assent, respectively 3. Parents and children were unable to read, speak, or understand English 4. Child had a medical condition or used medication(s) that could limit study participation
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Feasibility of the pilot intervention using the RE-AIM Framework. The RE-AIM Framework, a planning and evaluation tool for community-based health interventions (Estabrooks & Glasgow, 2006; Glasgow, Vogt, & Boles, 1999) will be used to determine the feasibility of the C.H.A.M.P. Families pilot intervention via an in-depth examination of five broad dimensions: 1. Reach: Family (parent and child) demographics will be compared to census demographics in London, Ontario, Canada to determine the reach of C.H.A.M.P. Families. In addition, records of participant and/or non-participant inquiries into the program will be used to analyze: (a) participate rate; (b) reasons for participating; (c) reasons for declining to participate; and (d) the most effective recruitment methods. 2. Effectiveness: In the present study, effectiveness will be measured via the short-term (i.e. baseline to mid- and/or post-intervention) measurements of the secondary outcomes described below (i.e. child outcomes: BMI-z, physical activity levels and sedentary time, parent- and self-reported health-related quality of life, overall perceptions of the program; parent outcomes: BMI, family cohesion, satisfaction, and communication, parental self-efficacy for engaging children in healthy behaviours, overall perceptions of the program). Short-term attrition will be explored, and reasons for drop out will be reported. Qualitative data were collected via focus groups held during the last session of the program with both parents and children (separately) to explore the effectiveness of the program via participants’ experiences and perceptions of the intervention; these data will also be analyzed and reported. 3. Adoption (staff and setting levels): Data pertaining to and detailed descriptions of (e.g. roles, credentials, demographic information, and/or representativeness where applicable) delivery settings (YMCA, community organizations) and inter | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| As noted above, there were several secondary outcomes assessed in the C.H.A.M.P. Families research project, which represent the "Effectiveness" and "Maintenance-Individual" dimensions of RE-AIM discussed above. Data collection took place in the home of each participant to ensure the privacy and comfort of participants during the four measurement timepoints: baseline (=4 weeks pre-intervention), mid-intervention (Week 6), post-intervention (=2 weeks post intervention), and 6-month follow-up (June 2018). All of the secondary outcomes were assessed during each home visit, with the exception of the focus groups, which took place at the YMCA during the last group-based session of the intervention (Week 13). The following provides an overview of the secondary outcomes. Child outcomes: 1. Children’s Health-Related Quality of Life assessed using the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory 4.0 (PEDS-QL 4.0; Varni, Seid, & Rode, 1999). This valid and reliable measure includes a self-report component (n = 23 items) completed by the child as well as a proxy report component (n = 23 items) completed by the parent/guardian based on his or her perceptions of the child’s health-related quality of life (Varni, Seid, & Kurtin, 2001). 2. Children’s General Health and Wellbeing assessed via parent reports using The Child Health Questionnaire – Parent Form 50 (Landgraf et al., 1998), a valid and reliable survey designed to measure the quality of life of children aged 5-18 years (HealthActCHQ Inc., 2016). 3. Children’s Physical Activity and Sedentary Time measured objectively using Actical™ accelerometers (MiniMitter, Bend, Oregon). These small, lightweight devices collect information on the frequency, duration, and intensity of activity (i.e. sedentary, light, moderate, vigorous), and have been shown to be a valid and reliable predictor of physical activity in children (Evenson et al., 2008; Puyau et al., 2004). Children were | — |
Countries
Canada
Contacts
Public ContactKristen Reilly
Outcome results
None listed