243899 Assessing the school environmental factors associated with adolescents' physical activity during after school programs in San Antonio, Texas

Monday, October 31, 2011

Alice Fang Yan, MD, PhD , Department of Health and Kinesiology, University of Texas, San Antonio, TX
Katherine Velasquez, RN , Communities Putting Prevention to Work, City of San Antonio Metropolitan Health District, San Antonio, TX
Sha Ge, MA, PhD , Department of Sports Managment, Tianjin Normal University, Tian JIng, China
Elaine Duran, PT , Department of Health and Kinesiology, University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX
Gentry Kuehn, MS , Department of Health and Kinesiology, University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX
Objective: To determine after school program staff perceptions of the barriers and facilitators in engaging youth to be active in San Antonio public schools as a physical activity initiative of “Communities Putting Prevention to Work” (CPPW), a 15.6 million dollar obesity grant awarded to San Antonio Metropolitan Health District by the CDC.

Methods: Community-based participatory research (CBPR) strategies were employed. District after-school program staff, including those from socioeconomic disadvantaged neighborhoods, participated in a survey. Physical activity (PA) related environmental assessments included: audit features and quality of school PA space, facilities during the after school period, supervised or non-supervised extracurricular PA opportunities after school, and use of school facilities outside school hours. The analysis included cross-tabulation and chi square.

Results: Among the respondents, more than half were after school program site supervisors (52.1%), followed by site staff (39.6%). Gymnasium, grassy field, and blacktop playground (72.1%) were identified as the top three resources available in after school programs. In terms of barriers, 70.5% respondents reported not having enough equipment (e.g., balls) so each child can have one, and 83.3% reported not having track or walking/running trails available. For joint-use programs, basketball courts, gym, and playground were the most often mentioned facilities and/or fields open to the public after school hours. Other detailed attributes of school PA facilities were integrated into an interactive web-based GIS to assess the school inventories in relation to study outcomes.

Conclusions: Findings demonstrated that CBPR is useful for identifying intervention strategies and feasibility in schools.

Learning Areas:
Implementation of health education strategies, interventions and programs
Planning of health education strategies, interventions, and programs
Public health or related education
Public health or related public policy
Systems thinking models (conceptual and theoretical models), applications related to public health

Learning Objectives:
1. Describe the significance of school physical education and physical activity to combat a sedentary lifestyle and obesity 2. Identify perceived school related environmental facilitators in engaging youth to be active in school 3. Describe policy strategies to ensure sufficient quantity and quality of physical activity in after-school programs and school facilities

Keywords: Physical Activity, Community Collaboration

Presenting author's disclosure statement:

Qualified on the content I am responsible for because: I conceived of the research questions, conducted the analysis, and wrote the abstract.
Any relevant financial relationships? No

I agree to comply with the American Public Health Association Conflict of Interest and Commercial Support Guidelines, and to disclose to the participants any off-label or experimental uses of a commercial product or service discussed in my presentation.

See more of: School Wellness
See more of: School Health Education and Services