The GRANDPACT Project: The Development and Evaluation of an Intergenerational Program for Grandchildren and Their Grandparents to Stimulate Physical Activity and Cognitive Function Using Co-Creation

Barriers and facilitators to older adult participation in intergenerational physical activity program: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The intergenerational physical activity program aims to promote the health, social engagement, and well-being of older adults. It is essential to comprehend the barriers and facilitators that affect their involvement to develop successful intervention strategies. This systematic review critically examines available research to identify the factors that impact the participation of older adults in intergenerational physical activity programs.

METHODS

This study retrieved 13 electronic databases (from January 2000 to March 2023) and used a social-ecological model to classify and analyze the identified facilitators and barriers.

RESULTS

A total of 12 articles were included, which identified 73 facilitators and 37 barriers. These factors were condensed into 7 primary themes and 14 sub-themes in total.

CONCLUSIONS

The factors influencing the participation of older adults in intergenerational physical activities are multifaceted. These factors guide project developers, policymakers, and practitioners in developing and implementing intergenerational physical activity programs to help address global aging issues and promote intergenerational connections.

TRIAL REGISTRY

PROSPERO ID: CRD42023420758.

Synergizing the Behavior Change Wheel and a Cocreative Approach to Design a Physical Activity Intervention for Adolescents and Young Adults With Intellectual Disabilities: Development Study

BACKGROUND

There is a need for physical activity promotion interventions in adolescents and young adults with intellectual disabilities. Current interventions have shown limited effectiveness, which may be attributed to the absence of theory and a population-specific development. Combining a planning model (including theory) and cocreation with the target audience during intervention development could potentially address this gap.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to report the systematic development of the Move it, Move ID! intervention by describing how the 8 different steps of the Behavior Change Wheel (BCW) were applied and present the results that emerged from those steps. In doing so, the (theoretical) content of the intervention is described in detail.

METHODS

A total of 23 adolescents and young adults (aged 14-22 years) with mild to moderate intellectual disabilities were designated as cocreators of the intervention. Across 2 groups, 6 similar cocreation sessions were organized in each. The content and sequence of the sessions were structured to align with the 8 steps of the BCW. All sessions were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Both a deductive (ie, steps of the BCW) and inductive (ie, resonating the voice of the participants) analysis approach were applied specifically focusing on identifying and describing the findings within each of the BCW steps.

RESULTS

After behavioral analysis (steps 1-4), 10 intervention goals were chosen and linked to Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation-Behavior components (theory within the BCW) that needed to be addressed. Psychological capability, social opportunity, and reflective motivation were emphasized as the first targets to focus on. A key finding was the urge for real-life social connectedness and social integration, which makes the social component as part of physical activity a central theme to focus on within intervention development. Judgments on the most suitable intervention functions (step 5) and behavior change techniques (step 7) were explained. When discussing the mode of delivery of the intervention (step 8), it was underscored that solely relying on a mobile health app would not fulfill participants' social needs. Hence, the chosen intervention adopts a dyadic approach in which young individuals with intellectual disabilities are matched with peers without intellectual disabilities to engage in physical activities together, with a mobile app playing a supportive role in this partnership.

CONCLUSIONS

The transparent description of the development process highlights why certain intervention components and behavior change techniques were chosen and how they are intertwined by means of the selected intervention design. This paper provides a detailed blueprint for practitioners wanting to integrate the BCW and its associated behavior change techniques, in combination with actively involving the target group, into their intervention development for people with intellectual disabilities.

Determinants of caregiving grandparents' physical activity and sedentary behavior: a qualitative study using focus group discussions

BACKGROUND

Evidence on the factors influencing physical activity (PA) and sedentary behavior (SB) in middle-aged and older adults taking care of their grandchild(ren) is limited, even though this knowledge seems imperative when considering the unique relationship between grandparents and their grandchild(ren) as well as the rising popularity of intergenerational interventions targeting these energy-expenditure related behaviors. Therefore, this explorative qualitative study aimed to identify the determinants of PA and SB levels among Flemish caregiving grandparents in the presence of their grandchild(ren) aged between 0-5 years.

METHODS

Six online focus group discussions were conducted via Microsoft Teams, all of which were audio- and videotaped with permission granted by the participating grandparents. In total, nine caregiving grandfathers and 28 caregiving grandmothers (overall mean age = 60.9 ± 4.1y) participated in this study. An inductive content analysis approach was used to derive subcategories, categories and themes from the verbatim transcribed data using NVivo R1.

RESULTS

Caregiving grandparents' levels of PA and SB were both influenced by personal determinants (e.g., physical health, grandparental perceptions and responsibilities), interpersonal determinants (e.g., characteristics of the grandchild(ren), such as age-related physical/motor development and family interaction), and environmental determinants (e.g., weather and seasonal circumstances). PA levels of caregiving grandparents were further affected by additional personal determinants (e.g., age of the grandparent, planning and location) and interpersonal determinants (e.g., characteristics of the grandchild(ren), such as new experiences of the grandchild(ren)). Additionally, some personal determinants (e.g., perception of educational value) and interpersonal determinants (e.g., characteristics of the grandchild(ren), such as age-related cognitive development and health of the grandchild(ren)) were strictly mentioned to influence caregiving grandparents' SB.

CONCLUSIONS

Acknowledging the unique relationship between grandparents and their grandchild(ren), the current study identified specific factors determining grandparents' PA and SB levels during the provision of grandchild care. Besides, it turned out of importance to take the interplay between the different determinants into account. Especially, for those grandparents with older grandchild(ren), within the studied 0-5 years age range, more attention should be paid to grandchild characteristics as part of the interpersonal determinants when setting up interventions to improve levels of PA and SB in caregiving grandparents.