Developing and Testing an Implementation Strategy for Active Learning to Promote Physical Activity in Children

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
The purpose of this study is to develop an implementation strategy to improve the use and sustainment of active learning in elementary schools and to conduct a feasibility study to evaluate the impact of the developed implementation strategy on the implementation and effectiveness of active learning.

Official Title
-----------------
Developing and Testing an Implementation Strategy for Active Learning to Promote Physical Activity in Children

Conditions
-----------------
Physical Activity

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Behavioral: implementation strategy for active learning to promote physical activity
* Behavioral: Usual Implementation support


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: lead teachers that teach kindergarten to fifth grade children in kindergarten to fifth grade Exclusion Criteria: non English or Spanish speaking

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 5 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Design Details

Primary Purpose: Prevention
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: None (Open Label)


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Experimental: implementation strategy for active learning to promote physical activity<br> | Behavioral: implementation strategy for active learning to promote physical activity<br>* The experimental arm includes using a multifaceted implementation strategy to support the use of active learning approaches. The strategy will consist of a series of skills-based staff trainings, identifying program champions to help lead efforts within the school, establishing an audit and feedback system to monitor the use of active learning, and a reinforcement system to recognize staff who are successfully implementing.<br>|
| Active Comparator: Usual Implementation support<br> | Behavioral: Usual Implementation support<br>* Usual support consists of the potential to access general resources from the district wellness department. These resources include access to funds to send staff to external trainings and general guidance for how to use active learning approaches.<br>|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Acceptability of the implementation strategy and active learning among teachers as assessed by the Acceptability of Implementation Measure (AIM) | The Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM) is a 4-item measure that uses a 5-point Likert scale for each question. A sum score will be used, which can range from 4-20, with higher scores representing higher levels of acceptability. | Baseline | 
| Acceptability of the implementation strategy and active learning among teachers as assessed by the Acceptability of Implementation Measure (AIM) | The Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM) is a 4-item measure that uses a 5-point Likert scale for each question. A sum score will be used, which can range from 4-20, with higher scores representing higher levels of acceptability. | 6 months follow up | 
| Acceptability of the implementation strategy and active learning among teachers as assessed by the Acceptability of Implementation Measure (AIM) | The Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM) is a 4-item measure that uses a 5-point Likert scale for each question. A sum score will be used, which can range from 4-20, with higher scores representing higher levels of acceptability. | 12 months follow up | 
| Acceptability of active learning among students as assessed by the Acceptability of Implementation Measure (AIM) | The Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM) is a 4-item measure that uses a 5-point Likert scale for each question. A sum score will be used, which can range from 4-20, with higher scores representing higher levels of acceptability. | Baseline | 
| Acceptability of active learning among students as assessed by the Acceptability of Implementation Measure (AIM) | The Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM) is a 4-item measure that uses a 5-point Likert scale for each question. A sum score will be used, which can range from 4-20, with higher scores representing higher levels of acceptability. | 6 months follow up | 
| Acceptability of active learning among students as assessed by the Acceptability of Implementation Measure (AIM) | The Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM) is a 4-item measure that uses a 5-point Likert scale for each question. A sum score will be used, which can range from 4-20, with higher scores representing higher levels of acceptability. | 12 months follow up | 
| Implementation Fidelity as assessed by self-reported implementation logs to assess dose of delivery | Implementation logs will be completed weekly throughout the study and dose of delivery is the number of minutes per week of active learning used. | 6 months | 
| Implementation Fidelity as assessed by self-reported implementation logs to assess dose of delivery | Implementation logs will be completed weekly throughout the study and dose of delivery is the number of minutes per week of active learning used. | 12 months | 
| Student Physical Activity as indicated by number of minutes spent in moderate and vigorous physical activity as assessed by the Actigraph GT3X+ accelerometer |  | baseline | 
| Student Physical Activity as indicated by number of minutes spent in moderate and vigorous physical activity as assessed by the Actigraph GT3X+ accelerometer |  | 6 month follow up | 
| Student Physical Activity as indicated by number of minutes spent in moderate and vigorous physical activity as assessed by the Actigraph GT3X+ accelerometer |  | 12 month follow up | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Health fitness as assessed by FitnessGram (body mass index) |  | baseline | 
| Health fitness as assessed by the FitnessGram (body mass index) |  | 6 months | 
| Health fitness as assessed by the FitnessGram (body mass index) |  | 12 month follow up | 
| Health fitness as assessed by number of participants who meet the FitnessGram aerobic capacity standard |  | baseline | 
| Health fitness as assessed by number of participants who meet the FitnessGram aerobic capacity standard |  | 6 month follow up | 
| Health fitness as assessed by number of participants who meet the FitnessGram aerobic capacity standard |  | 12 month follow up | 
| Academic Performance as assessed by Test scores | Score ranges from 0 to 100, with a higher score indicating a better outcome. | Baseline | 
| Academic Performance as assessed by Test scores | Score ranges from 0 to 100, with a higher score indicating a better outcome. | 6 month follow up | 
| Academic Performance as assessed by Test scores | Score ranges from 0 to 100, with a higher score indicating a better outcome. | 12 month follow up | 
| Implementation Fidelity as assessed by direct observation to assess quality | Direct observation will be conducted by trained staff throughout the study.Fidelity quality is indicated based on the student response. This is determined by the approximate percent of students in the class who are participating in active learning averaged across the active learning sessions used. A higher percentage of student participation indicates a higher quality of active learning delivery. | 6 month follow up | 
| Implementation Fidelity as assessed by direct observation to assess quality | Direct observation will be conducted by trained staff throughout the study.Fidelity quality is indicated based on the student response. This is determined by the approximate percent of students in the class who are participating in active learning averaged across the active learning sessions used. A higher percentage of student participation indicates a higher quality of active learning delivery. | 12 month follow up | 
| Implementation Fidelity as assessed by direct observation to assess adherence | Direct observation will be conducted by trained staff throughout the study.Fidelity adherence is indicated by the percentage of occurrence of teacher-directed active learning during an observation period. This is determined by the total number of intervals of teacher directed classroom movement activities relative to the total number of intervals of observation. A higher percentage indicates a greater adherence to active learning. | 6 month follow up | 
| Implementation Fidelity as assessed by direct observation to assess adherence | Direct observation will be conducted by trained staff throughout the study.Fidelity adherence is indicated by the percentage of occurrence of teacher-directed active learning during an observation period. This is determined by the total number of intervals of teacher directed classroom movement activities relative to the total number of intervals of observation. A higher percentage indicates a greater adherence to active learning. | 12 month follow up | 

 Terms related to the study
=================
Keywords Provided by Centre Hospitalier Valida
-----------------
Implementation of Physical Activity Programs in Schools