|Title||Care-physical activity initiatives in the neighbourhood : Study protocol for mixed-methods research on participation, effective elements, impact, and funding methods|
|Author(s)||Wagemakers, Annemarie; Mulderij, Lisanne S.; Verkooijen, Kirsten T.; Groenewoud, Stef; Koelen, Maria A.|
|Source||BMC Public Health 18 (2018)1. - ISSN 1471-2458|
Health and Society
|Publication type||Refereed Article in a scientific journal|
|Keyword(s)||Care - Effective elements - Funding models - Health in all policies - Participation - Physical activity - Socioeconomic status|
Background: In the Netherlands, people with a low socioeconomic status (SES) live approximately 6 years less and are less engaged in physical activity (PA) than high SES citizens. This contributes to the persistent health inequalities between low and high SES citizens. Care-PA initiatives are deemed effective for stimulating PA and improving health and participation among peoples with a low SES. In those initiatives, multiple sectors (e.g. sports, health insurers, municipalities) collaborate to connect primary care and PA at neighbourhood level. This study focuses on two Dutch municipalities that aim to invest in Health in All Policies (HiAP) and care-PA initiatives to improve the health of people with low SES. The aim is to gain insight into (1) the short-term (3 months) and long-term (1 year) outcomes of participating in care-PA initiatives for low SES citizens in terms of health, quality of life, and societal participation, (2) the effective elements that contribute to these outcomes, (3) the direct and perceived societal costs and benefits of care-PA initiatives, and (4) alternative ways to fund integrated care, prevention, and care-PA initiatives at neighbourhood level. Methods: The study will be built on a mixed-methods design guided by action research to continuously facilitate participatory processes and practical solutions. To assess outcomes, body measurements and questionnaires will be used as part of a pre-test/post-test design. Focus groups and interviews will be conducted to gain an in-depth understanding of outcomes and action elements. Action elements will be explored by using multiple tools: concept mapping, the logic model, and capacity mapping. Direct and perceived societal costs will be measured by administrative data from healthcare insurers (before-after design) and the effectiveness arena. An alternative funding model will be identified based on literature study, expert meetings, and municipal workshops. Discussion: Initiatives addressing multiple factors at different levels in an integral way are a challenge for evaluation. Multi-methods and tools are required, and data need to be interpreted comprehensively in order to contribute to a contextual insight into what works and why in relation to HiAP and care-PA initiatives.