Evaluation of a standard provision versus an autonomy promotive exercise referral programme: Rationale and study design
Background. The National Institute of Clinical Excellence in the UK has recommended that the effectiveness of ongoing exercise referral schemes to promote physical activity should be examined in research trials. Recent empirical evidence in health care and physical activity promotion contexts provid...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Published: |
BioMed Central Ltd
2009
|
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/34408 |
| _version_ | 1848754214538313728 |
|---|---|
| author | Jolly, K. Duda, J. Daley, A. Eves, F. Mutrie, N. Ntoumanis, Nikos Rouse, P. Lodhia, R. Williams, G. |
| author_facet | Jolly, K. Duda, J. Daley, A. Eves, F. Mutrie, N. Ntoumanis, Nikos Rouse, P. Lodhia, R. Williams, G. |
| author_sort | Jolly, K. |
| building | Curtin Institutional Repository |
| collection | Online Access |
| description | Background. The National Institute of Clinical Excellence in the UK has recommended that the effectiveness of ongoing exercise referral schemes to promote physical activity should be examined in research trials. Recent empirical evidence in health care and physical activity promotion contexts provides a foundation for testing the utility of a Self Determination Theory (SDT)-based exercise referral consultation. Methods/Design. Design: An exploratory cluster randomised controlled trial comparing standard provision exercise on prescription with a Self Determination Theory-based (SDT) exercise on prescription intervention. Participants: 347 people referred to the Birmingham Exercise on Prescription scheme between November 2007 and July 2008. The 13 exercise on prescription sites in Birmingham were randomised to current practice (n = 7) or to the SDT-based intervention (n = 6). Outcomes measured at 3 and 6-months: Minutes of moderate or vigorous physical activity per week assessed using the 7-day Physical Activity Recall; physical health: blood pressure and weight; health status measured using the Dartmouth CO-OP charts; anxiety and depression measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and vitality measured by the subjective vitality score; motivation and processes of change: perceptions of autonomy support from the advisor, satisfaction of the needs for competence, autonomy, and relatedness via physical activity, and motivational regulations for exercise. Discussion. This trial will determine whether an exercise referral programme based on Self Determination Theory increases physical activity and other health outcomes compared to a standard programme and will test the underlying SDT-based process model (perceived autonomy support, need satisfaction, motivation regulations, outcomes) via structural equation modelling. Trial registration. The trial is registered as Current Controlled trials ISRCTN07682833. © 2009 Jolly et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. |
| first_indexed | 2025-11-14T08:36:51Z |
| format | Journal Article |
| id | curtin-20.500.11937-34408 |
| institution | Curtin University Malaysia |
| institution_category | Local University |
| last_indexed | 2025-11-14T08:36:51Z |
| publishDate | 2009 |
| publisher | BioMed Central Ltd |
| recordtype | eprints |
| repository_type | Digital Repository |
| spelling | curtin-20.500.11937-344082017-09-13T15:13:59Z Evaluation of a standard provision versus an autonomy promotive exercise referral programme: Rationale and study design Jolly, K. Duda, J. Daley, A. Eves, F. Mutrie, N. Ntoumanis, Nikos Rouse, P. Lodhia, R. Williams, G. Background. The National Institute of Clinical Excellence in the UK has recommended that the effectiveness of ongoing exercise referral schemes to promote physical activity should be examined in research trials. Recent empirical evidence in health care and physical activity promotion contexts provides a foundation for testing the utility of a Self Determination Theory (SDT)-based exercise referral consultation. Methods/Design. Design: An exploratory cluster randomised controlled trial comparing standard provision exercise on prescription with a Self Determination Theory-based (SDT) exercise on prescription intervention. Participants: 347 people referred to the Birmingham Exercise on Prescription scheme between November 2007 and July 2008. The 13 exercise on prescription sites in Birmingham were randomised to current practice (n = 7) or to the SDT-based intervention (n = 6). Outcomes measured at 3 and 6-months: Minutes of moderate or vigorous physical activity per week assessed using the 7-day Physical Activity Recall; physical health: blood pressure and weight; health status measured using the Dartmouth CO-OP charts; anxiety and depression measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and vitality measured by the subjective vitality score; motivation and processes of change: perceptions of autonomy support from the advisor, satisfaction of the needs for competence, autonomy, and relatedness via physical activity, and motivational regulations for exercise. Discussion. This trial will determine whether an exercise referral programme based on Self Determination Theory increases physical activity and other health outcomes compared to a standard programme and will test the underlying SDT-based process model (perceived autonomy support, need satisfaction, motivation regulations, outcomes) via structural equation modelling. Trial registration. The trial is registered as Current Controlled trials ISRCTN07682833. © 2009 Jolly et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2009 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/34408 10.1186/1471-2458-9-176 BioMed Central Ltd unknown |
| spellingShingle | Jolly, K. Duda, J. Daley, A. Eves, F. Mutrie, N. Ntoumanis, Nikos Rouse, P. Lodhia, R. Williams, G. Evaluation of a standard provision versus an autonomy promotive exercise referral programme: Rationale and study design |
| title | Evaluation of a standard provision versus an autonomy promotive exercise referral programme: Rationale and study design |
| title_full | Evaluation of a standard provision versus an autonomy promotive exercise referral programme: Rationale and study design |
| title_fullStr | Evaluation of a standard provision versus an autonomy promotive exercise referral programme: Rationale and study design |
| title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of a standard provision versus an autonomy promotive exercise referral programme: Rationale and study design |
| title_short | Evaluation of a standard provision versus an autonomy promotive exercise referral programme: Rationale and study design |
| title_sort | evaluation of a standard provision versus an autonomy promotive exercise referral programme: rationale and study design |
| url | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/34408 |