Intervention effects on children’s movement behaviour accumulation as a result of the Transform-Us! school- and home-based cluster randomised controlled trial

Abstract

Background: It is unknown if and how children’s movement behaviour accumulation patterns change as a result of physical activity and/or sedentary behaviour interventions. It is important to establish the efectiveness of interven‑ tions targeting changes in such accumulation patterns. This study aimed to investigate the efect of the Transform-Us! school- and home-based intervention program on children’s movement behaviour accumulation patterns, focusing on sporadic accumulation versus time in bouts. Methods: Baseline and post-intervention (18months) accelerometer data from the Transform-Us! 2×2 facto‑ rial design cluster randomised controlled trial was used (Melbourne, 2010–2012; analytical sample n =267; aged 8–9 years). Linear mixed models were ftted to examine efects of three diferent interventions (targeting increases in physical activity [PA-I], reductions in sedentary time [SB-I], or both [PA+SB-I]) compared to a usual practice (control) group on post-intervention movement behaviour accumulation compositions with eight components, including sporadic time and bouts of sedentary time, and light-, moderate- and vigorous-intensity physical activity. Results: Intervention efects on distribution of time in the post-intervention waking movement behaviour accumu‑ lation composition (adjusted for baseline composition) were small and not signifcant. However, visual inspection of the change in compositions over time revealed that only groups with a sedentary behaviour intervention compo‑ nent (SB-I and PA+SB-I) reduced time in sedentary bouts, compared to the overall sample compositional mean. In addition, the SB-I group was the only group with an increase in vigorous-intensity physical activity. The combined intervention group (PA+SB-I) was characterized by the largest proportional increase in MPA bouts. The usual practice group was characterized by the largest proportional increases in both sporadic and bouts of sedentary time. Conclusions: This study showed some early evidence to suggest that the “break up your sitting” message may result in greater impact than the “move more” message. Future research, including larger sample sizes, should investigate if this type of messaging is indeed more efective in changing movement behaviours and ultimately child health.