Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Public Health
Published in: BMC Public Health 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Research article

Feasibility study of the SWITCH implementation process for enhancing school wellness

Authors: Senlin Chen, David A. Dzewaltowski, Richard R. Rosenkranz, Lorraine Lanningham-Foster, Spyridoula Vazou, Douglas A. Gentile, Joey A. Lee, Kyle J. Braun, Maren M. Wolff, Gregory J. Welk

Published in: BMC Public Health | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

There is a need to identify strategies that enhance the implementation of evidence-based school wellness intervention programs in real-world settings. The present study evaluates the feasibility of empowering school wellness leaders to deliver an evidence-based, childhood obesity-prevention program called Switch ™. We specifically evaluated the feasibility of a new implementation framework, based on the robust Healthy Youth Places framework, to increase capacity of school leaders to lead school wellness programming.

Methods

The SWITCH (School Wellness Integration Targeting Child Health) implementation process was evaluated in a convenience sample of eight Iowa elementary schools. Teams of three leaders from each school attended an in-person school wellness conference followed by five online webinar sessions delivered by two SWITCH team members. The capacity-building and quality improvement process was designed to empower schools to lead wellness change using methods and concepts from the original 16-week Switch ™ program. School wellness leaders completed checklists on two occasions to assess overall school-level implementation as well as setting-level changes in physical education, classrooms, and the lunchroom. Student acceptability of SWITCH was evaluated by the degree of behavior tracking using an online SWITCH Tracker system that promoted self-monitoring. School acceptability and practicality were assessed through an exit survey completed by school leaders.

Results

All school staff reported satisfaction with the SWITCH implementation process. Reports of school- and setting-level implementation were relatively high (2.0 to 2.8 on a 3-point scale) but student engagement, based on use of the online tracking system, varied greatly over time and across schools. Three high implementation schools had average tracking rates exceeding 70% (range: 72–90%) while three low implementation schools had rates lower than 30% (range = 0–23%).

Conclusions

This feasibility study supports the utility of the new implementation framework for promoting school and student engagement with SWITCH. Further testing regarding effectiveness and scale-up of this evidence-based school wellness intervention program is warranted.
Literature
1.
Pate RR, O'Neill JR. Summary of the American Heart Association scientific statement: promoting physical activity in children and youth: a leadership role for schools. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2008;23(1):44–9.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Sobol-Goldberg S, Rabinowitz J, Gross R. School-based obesity prevention programs: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Obesity. 2013;21(12):2422–8.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Klesges LM, Williams NA, Davis KS, Buscemi J, Kitzmann KM. External validity reporting in behavioral treatment of childhood obesity a systematic review. Am J Prev Med. 2012;42(2):185–92.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
Proctor EK, Brownson RC. In: Brownson RC, Colditz GA, Proctor EK, editors. Measurement issues in dissemination and implementation research. Edn. New York: Oxford University Press; 2012. p. 261–80.
5.
Rabin BA, Brownson RC. In: Brownson RC, Colditz GA, Proctor EK, editors. Developing the terminology for dissemination research. Edn. New York: Oxford University Press; 2012. p. 23–51.
6.
Eisenmann JC, Gentile DA, Welk GJ, Callahan R, Strickland S, Walsh M, Walsh DA. SWITCH: rationale, design, and implementation of a community, school, and family-based intervention to modify behaviors related to childhood obesity. BMC Public Health. 2008;8:223.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
Gentile DA, Welk G, Eisenmann JC, Reimer RA, Walsh DA, Russell DW, Callahan R, Walsh M, Strickland S, Fritz K. Evaluation of a multiple ecological level child obesity prevention program: switch what you do, view, and chew. BMC Med. 2009;7:49.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
Bowen DJ, Kreuter M, Spring B, Cofta-Woerpel L, Linnan L, Weiner D, Bakken S, Kaplan CP, Squiers L, Fabrizio C, et al. How we design feasibility studies. Am J Prev Med. 2009;36(5):452–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
9.
Rosenkranz RR, Dzewaltowski DA. Model of the home food environment pertaining to childhood obesity. Nutr Rev. 2008;66(3):123–40.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Welk GJ, Chen S, Nam YH, Weber TE. A formative evaluation of the SWITCH(R) obesity prevention program: print versus online programming. BMC Obes. 2015;2:20.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
Dzewaltowski DA, Estabrooks PA, Johnston JA. Healthy youth places promoting nutrition and physical activity. Health Educ Res. 2002;17(5):541–51.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Dzewaltowski DA, Estabrooks PA, Welk G, Hill J, Milliken G, Karteroliotis K, Johnston JA. Healthy youth places: a randomized controlled trial to determine the effectiveness of facilitating adult and youth leaders to promote physical activity and fruit and vegetable consumption in middle schools. Health Educ Behav. 2009;36(3):583–600.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Lewallen TC, Hunt H, Potts-Datema W, Zaza S, Giles W. The whole school, whole community, whole child model: a new approach for improving educational attainment and healthy development for students. J Sch Health. 2015;85(11):729–39.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
Rooney LE, Videto DM, Birch DA. Using the whole school, whole community, whole child model: implications for practice. J Sch Health. 2015;85(11):817–23.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
Institutes of Medicine. Educating the student body taking physical activity and physical education to school. Washington DC: National Academies Press; 2013.
16.
Welk GJ, Jackson AW, Morrow JR, Haskell WH, Meredith MD, Cooper KH. The Association of Health-Related Fitness with Indicators of academic performance in Texas schools. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2010;81(3):S16–23.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Donnelly JE, Lambourne K. Classroom-based physical activity, cognition, and academic achievement. Prev Med. 2011;52:S36–42.CrossRefPubMed
18.
American Institute for Research: First principles: Community engagement in education programs compendium.; 2011.
19.
Krishnaswami J, Martinson M, Wakimoto P, Anglemeyer A. Community-engaged interventions on diet, activity, and weight outcomes in U.S. schools a systematic review. Am J Prev Med. 2012;43(1):81–91.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Dzewaltowski DA, Rosenkranz RR, Geller KS, Coleman KJ, Welk GJ, Hastmann TJ, Milliken GA. HOP'N after-school project: an obesity prevention randomized controlled trial. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2010;7:90.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
Rollnick S, Miller WR, Butler CC. Motivational interviewing in health care: helping patients change behavior. New York: The Guilford Press; 2007.
22.
Soderlund LL, Madson MB, Rubak S, Nilsen P. A systematic review of motivational interviewing training for general health care practitioners. Patient Educ Couns. 2011;84(1):16–26.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Miller WR, Rollnick S. Motivational interviewing: preparing people to change addictive behavior. New York: The Guilford Press; 1991.
24.
Hoelscher DM, Moag-Stahlberg A, Ellis K, Vandewater EA, Malkani R. Evaluation of a student participatory, low-intensity program to improve school wellness environment and students’ eating and activity behaviors. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2016;13:59.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
25.
Beck J, Jensen LH, Hill JO. Implications of facilitators and barriers to implementing fuel up to play 60. Health Behavior and Policy Review. 2015;2(5):388–400.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
26.
Blaine RE, Franckle RL, Ganter C, Falbe J, Giles C, Criss S, Kwass JA, Land T, Gortmaker SL, Chuang E, et al. Using school staff members to implement a childhood obesity prevention intervention in low-income school districts: the Massachusetts childhood obesity research demonstration (MA-CORD project), 2012-2014. Prev Chronic Dis. 2017;14:E03.
27.
Sanchez V, Hale R, Andrews M, Cruz Y, Bettencourt V, Wexler P, Halasan C. School wellness policy implementation: insights and recommendations from two rural school districts. Health Promot Pract. 2014;15(3):340–8.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Langford R, Bonell C, Jones H, Pouliou T, Murphy S, Waters E, Komro K, Gibbs L, Magnus D, Campbell R. The World Health Organization's health promoting schools framework: a Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Public Health. 2015;15:130.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
29.
Coleman KJ, Shordon M, Caparosa SL, Pomichowski ME, Dzewaltowski DA. The healthy options for nutrition environments in schools (healthy ONES) group randomized trial: using implementation models to change nutrition policy and environments in low income schools. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2012;9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
30.
Ryan RM, Deci EL. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Am Psychol. 2000;55(1):68–78.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Walker JR. Wellness promotion: school nurses as models of health. NASN School Nurse. 2014;29(3):128–9.CrossRefPubMed
32.
United States Department of Agriculture. Local school wellness policy implementation under the healthy, hunger-free kids act of 2010. In: Federal Register. vol. 81; 2016.
33.
van de Mortel TF. Faking it: social desirability response bias in self-report research. Aust J Adv Nurs. 2008;25(4):40–8.
Metadata
Title
Feasibility study of the SWITCH implementation process for enhancing school wellness
Authors
Senlin Chen
David A. Dzewaltowski
Richard R. Rosenkranz
Lorraine Lanningham-Foster
Spyridoula Vazou
Douglas A. Gentile
Joey A. Lee
Kyle J. Braun
Maren M. Wolff
Gregory J. Welk
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Public Health / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2458
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-018-6024-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

BMC Public Health 1/2018 Go to the issue

Research article

Chronic bronchitis and airflow obstruction is associated with household cooking fuel use among never-smoking women: a community-based cross-sectional study in Odisha, India

Study protocol

Communities in charge of alcohol (CICA): a protocol for a stepped-wedge randomised control trial of an alcohol health champions programme

Research article

Investigation into the metric properties of the workplace social capital questionnaire and its association with self-rated health and psychological distress amongst Greek-Cypriot registered nurses: cross-sectional descriptive study

Research article

Barrier or stressor? The role of discrimination experiences in health service use

Study protocol

Voices for food: methodologies for implementing a multi-state community-based intervention in rural, high poverty communities

Research article

Current high prevalences of Strongyloides stercoralis and Opisthorchis viverrini infections in rural communities in northeast Thailand and associated risk factors