TY - JOUR
T1 - Insufficient Reporting of Factors Associated with Exercise Referral Scheme Uptake, Attendance and Adherence
T2 - A Systematic Review of Reviews
AU - Shore, Colin
AU - Hubbard, Gill
AU - Gorely, Trish
AU - Hunter, Angus
AU - Polson, Robert
AU - Galloway, Stuart
N1 - Accepted author manuscript version reprinted, by permission, from Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 2019 (ahead of print). © Human Kinetics, Inc.
PY - 2019/7/28
Y1 - 2019/7/28
N2 - Background: Exercise Referral Schemes (ERS) are prescribed programmes aimed at tackling physical inactivity and associated non-communicable disease. Inconsistencies in reporting, recording and delivering ERS make it challenging to identify what works, why, and for whom. Methods: PRISMA guided this narrative review of reviews. Fifteen electronic databases were searched for systematic reviews of ERS. Reviewers applied inclusion criteria and quality assessed via the AMSTAR tool. Data on uptake, attendance and adherence were extracted. Results: Eleven reviews met the inclusion criteria. AMSTAR quality was medium. Definitions of uptake varied within reviews. Uptake ranged from 35%-81%. Groups reported as more likely to take up ERS included, (i) females and (ii) older adults. Attendance was defined variably but ranged from 12%-49%. Men were more likely to attend ERS. Effect of medical diagnosis upon uptake and attendance was inconsistent. Exercises prescribed were unreported and therefore, adherence to exercise prescriptions was unreported. The influence of theoretically-informed approaches on uptake, attendance and adherence was generally lacking, however, self-determination, peer support and supervision support were reported as influencing attendance. Conclusions: There was insufficient reporting across studies about uptake, attendance and adherence. Complex interventions like ERS require consistent definitions, recording and reporting of these key facets, but this is not evident from the existing literature.
AB - Background: Exercise Referral Schemes (ERS) are prescribed programmes aimed at tackling physical inactivity and associated non-communicable disease. Inconsistencies in reporting, recording and delivering ERS make it challenging to identify what works, why, and for whom. Methods: PRISMA guided this narrative review of reviews. Fifteen electronic databases were searched for systematic reviews of ERS. Reviewers applied inclusion criteria and quality assessed via the AMSTAR tool. Data on uptake, attendance and adherence were extracted. Results: Eleven reviews met the inclusion criteria. AMSTAR quality was medium. Definitions of uptake varied within reviews. Uptake ranged from 35%-81%. Groups reported as more likely to take up ERS included, (i) females and (ii) older adults. Attendance was defined variably but ranged from 12%-49%. Men were more likely to attend ERS. Effect of medical diagnosis upon uptake and attendance was inconsistent. Exercises prescribed were unreported and therefore, adherence to exercise prescriptions was unreported. The influence of theoretically-informed approaches on uptake, attendance and adherence was generally lacking, however, self-determination, peer support and supervision support were reported as influencing attendance. Conclusions: There was insufficient reporting across studies about uptake, attendance and adherence. Complex interventions like ERS require consistent definitions, recording and reporting of these key facets, but this is not evident from the existing literature.
KW - PRISMA
KW - compliance
KW - physical activity
KW - prescription
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85071714954&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85071714954&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1123/jpah.2018-0341
DO - 10.1123/jpah.2018-0341
M3 - Article
SN - 1543-3080
VL - 16
SP - 667
EP - 676
JO - Journal of Physical Activity and Health
JF - Journal of Physical Activity and Health
IS - 8
ER -