An explorative qualitative study on acceptability of physical activity assessment instruments among primary care professionals in southern Sydney

Shona Nicole Dutton, Sarah May Dennis, Nicholas Zwar, Mark Fort Harris

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: There are a substantial number of instruments for primary-care clinicians to assess physical-activity (PA). However, there are few studies that have explored the views of clinicians regarding comparative acceptability and ease of use. A better understanding of how clinicians perceive instruments could help overcome barriers, and inform future interventions. This study explored the acceptability of five PA-assessment instruments amongst a sample of Australian primary-care clinicians, including family-physicians (FP) and practice-nurses (PN). Methods: A purposive sample of FPs (N = 9) and PNs (N = 10) from eight family-practices in southern Sydney consented to participate. Stage-1 involved semi-structured interviews with participants to select preferred instruments. An analysis of the two preferred instruments was conducted as Stage-2, to identify differences in instrument purpose and content. Stage-3 involved participants using the two instruments, selected from Stage-1, for 12-weeks. At the end of this period, semi-structured interviews were repeated to explore clinician experience. Results: Clinicians indicated preferences for the GP-Physical-Activity-Questionnaire and 3-Questionnaire Physical-Activity-Questionnaire. These instruments demonstrated distinct variations in content, theoretical orientation, and outcome measures. Reasons for preference included; variations in individual clinician PA levels, knowledge in PA-assessment and instrument features. Conclusion: Findings demonstrated two instruments as preferred. Reasons for preference related to internal characteristics of clinicians such as variations in the level of individual PA and external circumstances, such as instrument features.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-12
Number of pages12
JournalBMC Family Practice
Volume17
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 22 Sep 2016
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Primary Health Care
Exercise
Family Practice
Interviews
Family Physicians
Nurses
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Surveys and Questionnaires

Cite this

@article{8dd0924b3187414f89d5c07b9f4dd861,
title = "An explorative qualitative study on acceptability of physical activity assessment instruments among primary care professionals in southern Sydney",
abstract = "Background: There are a substantial number of instruments for primary-care clinicians to assess physical-activity (PA). However, there are few studies that have explored the views of clinicians regarding comparative acceptability and ease of use. A better understanding of how clinicians perceive instruments could help overcome barriers, and inform future interventions. This study explored the acceptability of five PA-assessment instruments amongst a sample of Australian primary-care clinicians, including family-physicians (FP) and practice-nurses (PN). Methods: A purposive sample of FPs (N = 9) and PNs (N = 10) from eight family-practices in southern Sydney consented to participate. Stage-1 involved semi-structured interviews with participants to select preferred instruments. An analysis of the two preferred instruments was conducted as Stage-2, to identify differences in instrument purpose and content. Stage-3 involved participants using the two instruments, selected from Stage-1, for 12-weeks. At the end of this period, semi-structured interviews were repeated to explore clinician experience. Results: Clinicians indicated preferences for the GP-Physical-Activity-Questionnaire and 3-Questionnaire Physical-Activity-Questionnaire. These instruments demonstrated distinct variations in content, theoretical orientation, and outcome measures. Reasons for preference included; variations in individual clinician PA levels, knowledge in PA-assessment and instrument features. Conclusion: Findings demonstrated two instruments as preferred. Reasons for preference related to internal characteristics of clinicians such as variations in the level of individual PA and external circumstances, such as instrument features.",
author = "Dutton, {Shona Nicole} and Dennis, {Sarah May} and Nicholas Zwar and Harris, {Mark Fort}",
year = "2016",
month = "9",
day = "22",
doi = "10.1186/s12875-016-0536-6",
language = "English",
volume = "17",
pages = "1--12",
journal = "BMC Family Practice",
issn = "1471-2296",
publisher = "BMC",
number = "1",

}

An explorative qualitative study on acceptability of physical activity assessment instruments among primary care professionals in southern Sydney. / Dutton, Shona Nicole; Dennis, Sarah May; Zwar, Nicholas; Harris, Mark Fort.

In: BMC Family Practice, Vol. 17, No. 1, 22.09.2016, p. 1-12.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - An explorative qualitative study on acceptability of physical activity assessment instruments among primary care professionals in southern Sydney

AU - Dutton, Shona Nicole

AU - Dennis, Sarah May

AU - Zwar, Nicholas

AU - Harris, Mark Fort

PY - 2016/9/22

Y1 - 2016/9/22

N2 - Background: There are a substantial number of instruments for primary-care clinicians to assess physical-activity (PA). However, there are few studies that have explored the views of clinicians regarding comparative acceptability and ease of use. A better understanding of how clinicians perceive instruments could help overcome barriers, and inform future interventions. This study explored the acceptability of five PA-assessment instruments amongst a sample of Australian primary-care clinicians, including family-physicians (FP) and practice-nurses (PN). Methods: A purposive sample of FPs (N = 9) and PNs (N = 10) from eight family-practices in southern Sydney consented to participate. Stage-1 involved semi-structured interviews with participants to select preferred instruments. An analysis of the two preferred instruments was conducted as Stage-2, to identify differences in instrument purpose and content. Stage-3 involved participants using the two instruments, selected from Stage-1, for 12-weeks. At the end of this period, semi-structured interviews were repeated to explore clinician experience. Results: Clinicians indicated preferences for the GP-Physical-Activity-Questionnaire and 3-Questionnaire Physical-Activity-Questionnaire. These instruments demonstrated distinct variations in content, theoretical orientation, and outcome measures. Reasons for preference included; variations in individual clinician PA levels, knowledge in PA-assessment and instrument features. Conclusion: Findings demonstrated two instruments as preferred. Reasons for preference related to internal characteristics of clinicians such as variations in the level of individual PA and external circumstances, such as instrument features.

AB - Background: There are a substantial number of instruments for primary-care clinicians to assess physical-activity (PA). However, there are few studies that have explored the views of clinicians regarding comparative acceptability and ease of use. A better understanding of how clinicians perceive instruments could help overcome barriers, and inform future interventions. This study explored the acceptability of five PA-assessment instruments amongst a sample of Australian primary-care clinicians, including family-physicians (FP) and practice-nurses (PN). Methods: A purposive sample of FPs (N = 9) and PNs (N = 10) from eight family-practices in southern Sydney consented to participate. Stage-1 involved semi-structured interviews with participants to select preferred instruments. An analysis of the two preferred instruments was conducted as Stage-2, to identify differences in instrument purpose and content. Stage-3 involved participants using the two instruments, selected from Stage-1, for 12-weeks. At the end of this period, semi-structured interviews were repeated to explore clinician experience. Results: Clinicians indicated preferences for the GP-Physical-Activity-Questionnaire and 3-Questionnaire Physical-Activity-Questionnaire. These instruments demonstrated distinct variations in content, theoretical orientation, and outcome measures. Reasons for preference included; variations in individual clinician PA levels, knowledge in PA-assessment and instrument features. Conclusion: Findings demonstrated two instruments as preferred. Reasons for preference related to internal characteristics of clinicians such as variations in the level of individual PA and external circumstances, such as instrument features.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84995489056&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1186/s12875-016-0536-6

DO - 10.1186/s12875-016-0536-6

M3 - Article

VL - 17

SP - 1

EP - 12

JO - BMC Family Practice

JF - BMC Family Practice

SN - 1471-2296

IS - 1

ER -