Explore the vast range of titles available.

Despite a number of important global public health successes, for many health behaviours there is a continued lack of interventions that have been sufficiently scaled up to achieve system-wide integration. This has limited sustainable and equitable population health improvement. Systems change plays a major role in the relation between implementation processes and at-scale institutionalisation of public health interventions. However, in research, systems approaches remain underutilised in scaling up. Public health scale-up models have typically centred on intervention replication through linear expansion. In this paper, we discuss current conceptualisations and approaches used when scaling up in public health, and propose a new perspective on scaling that shifts attention away from the intervention to focus instead on achieving the desired population-level health outcomes. In our view, ‘scaling up’ exists on a continuum. At one end, effective scaling can involve a linear, intervention-orientated expansive approach that prioritises the spread of evidence-based interventions into existing systems in order to drive expansion in the application of that intervention. At the other end, we contend that scale-up can sit within a complex systems paradigm in which interventions are conceptualised as events in systems. In this case, implementation and scale-up activities should focus on generating changes within the system itself to achieve the desired outcome. This we refer to as ‘systems-orientated scale-up’ to achieving population health improvement, which can complement traditional approaches in relevant situations. We argue that for some health behaviours, our proposed approach towards scaling up could enhance intervention implementation, sustainability and population health impact.

Background Few efficacious physical activity interventions are successfully translated and sustained in practice. We propose a practical guide for researchers to increase the likelihood of successful implementation and scale up of physical activity interventions in practice contexts. The guide is based on two principles: (i) differences between the research and practice context can be addressed during intervention development and implementation planning by focusing on system, delivery personnel, and intervention characteristics; and (ii) early planning for implementation barriers and facilitators can improve subsequent translation into practice. Methods From the published literature, we identified evidence of strategies to improve research-practice translation, along with narrative descriptions of different approaches to addressing translational challenges. These, along with constructs taken from widely cited implementation outcome, process, and mechanistic models were collated and inform the guide. Results The resultant PRACTIS guide ( PRACT ical planning for I mplementation and S cale-up) comprised the following four iterative steps: Step 1 ) Characterize the parameters of the implementation setting; Step 2 ) Identify and engage key stakeholders across multiple levels within the delivery system(s); Step 3 ) Identify contextual barriers and facilitators to implementation, and; Step 4 ) Address potential barriers to effective implementation. Conclusions A lack of practical guidance for researchers on how to effectively plan implementation and scale up of physical activity interventions prevents us moving quickly from evidence to action. We recommend that intervention development and adaptation for broad and sustained implementation be prioritized early in intervention planning and include active engagement from delivery organizations and stakeholders. The PRACTIS guide is also relevant for clinical and public health researchers in other areas of prevention.

Background Globally, many children fail to meet the World Health Organization’s physical activity and sedentary behaviour guidelines. Schools are an ideal setting to intervene, yet despite many interventions in this setting, success when delivered under real-world conditions or at scale is limited. This systematic review aims to i) identify which implementation models are used in school-based physical activity effectiveness, dissemination, and/or implementation trials, and ii) identify factors associated with the adoption, implementation and sustainability of school-based physical activity interventions in real-world settings. Methods The review followed PRISMA guidelines and included a systematic search of seven databases from January 1st, 2000 to July 31st, 2018: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, PsycINFO, CENTRAL, and ERIC. A forward citation search of included studies using Google Scholar was performed on the 21st of January 2019 including articles published until the end of 2018. Study inclusion criteria: (i) a primary outcome to increase physical activity and/or decrease sedentary behaviour among school-aged children and/or adolescents; (ii) intervention delivery within school settings, (iii) use of implementation models to plan or interpret study results; and (iv) interventions delivered under real-world conditions. Exclusion criteria: (i) efficacy trials; (ii) studies applying or testing school-based physical activity policies, and; (iii) studies targeting special schools or pre-school and/or kindergarten aged children. Results 27 papers comprising 17 unique interventions were included. Fourteen implementation models (e.g., RE-AIM, Rogers’ Diffusion of Innovations, Precede Proceed model), were applied across 27 papers. Implementation models were mostly used to interpret results ( n  = 9), for planning evaluation and interpreting results ( n  = 8), for planning evaluation ( n  = 6), for intervention design ( n  = 4), or for a combination of designing the intervention and interpreting results ( n  = 3). We identified 269 factors related to barriers ( n  = 93) and facilitators ( n  = 176) for the adoption ( n  = 7 studies), implementation ( n  = 14 studies) and sustainability ( n  = 7 studies) of interventions. Conclusions Implementation model use was predominately centered on the interpretation of results and analyses, with few examples of use across all study phases as a planning tool and to understand results. This lack of implementation models applied may explain the limited success of interventions when delivered under real-world conditions or at scale. Trial registration PROSPERO ( CRD42018099836 ).

Background Sustainable shifts in population behaviours require system-level implementation and embeddedness of large-scale health interventions. This paper aims to understand how different contexts of scaling up interventions affect mechanisms to produce intended and unintended scale up outcomes. Methods A mixed method study combining a realist perspective and systems analysis (causal loop diagrams) of scaled-up physical activity and/or nutrition interventions implemented at a state/national level in Australia (2010–18). The study involved four distinct phases: Phase 1 expert consultation, database and grey literature searches to identify scaled-up interventions; Phase 2 generating initial Context-Mechanism-Outcome configurations (CMOs) from the WHO ExpandNet framework for scaling up; Phase 3 testing and refining CMOs via online surveys and realist interviews with academics, government and non-government organisations (NGOs) involved in scale up of selected interventions ( Phase 1 ); and Phase 4 generating cross-case mid-range theories represented in systems models of scaling up; validated by member checking. Descriptive statistics were reported for online survey data and realist analysis for interview data. Results Seven interventions were analysed, targeting nutrition ( n  = 1), physical activity (n = 1), or a combination ( n  = 5). Twenty-six participants completed surveys; 19 completed interviews. Sixty-three CMO pathways underpinned successful scale up, reflecting 36 scale up contexts, 8 key outcomes; linked via 53 commonly occurring mechanisms. All five WHO framework domains were represented in the systems models. Most CMO pathways included ‘intervention attributes’ and led to outcomes ‘community sustainability/embeddedness’ and ‘stakeholder buy-in/perceived value’. Irrespective of interventions being scaled in similar contexts (e.g., having political favourability); mechanisms still led to both intended and unintended scale up outcomes (e.g., increased or reduced sustainability). Conclusion This paper provides the first evidence for mechanisms underpinning outcomes required for successful scale up of state or nationally delivered interventions. Our findings challenge current prerequisites for effective scaling suggesting other conditions may be necessary. Future scale up approaches that plan for complexity and encourage iterative adaptation throughout, may enhance scale up outcomes. Current linear, context-to-outcome depictions of scale up oversimplify what is a clearly a complex interaction between perceptions, worldviews and goals of those involved. Mechanisms identified in this study could potentially be leveraged during future scale up efforts, to positively influence intervention scalability and sustainability.

Coronary heart disease (CHD) is a leading cause of disability and deaths worldwide. Secondary prevention, including cardiac rehabilitation (CR), is crucial to improve risk factors and to reduce disease burden and disability. Accessibility barriers contribute to underutilization of traditional center-based CR programs; therefore, alternative delivery models, including cardiac telerehabilitation (ie, delivery via mobile, smartphone, and/or web-based apps), have been tested. Experimental studies have shown cardiac telerehabilitation to be effective and cost-effective, but there is inadequate evidence about how to translate this research into routine clinical practice. This systematic review aimed to synthesize research evaluating the effectiveness of implementing cardiac telerehabilitation interventions at scale in routine clinical practice, including factors underlying successful implementation processes, and experimental research evaluating implementation-related outcomes. MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and Global Health databases were searched from 1990 through November 9, 2018, for studies evaluating the implementation of telerehabilitation for the self-management of CHD. Reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews were hand searched to identify additional studies. Implementation outcomes of interest included acceptability, appropriateness, adoption, feasibility, fidelity, implementation cost, penetration, and sustainability. A narrative synthesis of results was carried out. No included studies evaluated the implementation of cardiac telerehabilitation in routine clinical practice. A total of 10 studies of 2250 participants evaluated implementation outcomes, including acceptability (8/10, 80%), appropriateness (9/10, 90%), adoption (6/10, 60%), feasibility (6/10, 60%), fidelity (7/10, 70%), and implementation cost (4/10, 40%), predominantly from the participant perspective. Cardiac telerehabilitation interventions had high acceptance among the majority of participants, but technical challenges such as reliable broadband internet connectivity can impact acceptability and feasibility. Many participants considered telerehabilitation to be an appropriate alternative CR delivery model, as it was convenient, flexible, and easy to access. Participants valued interactive intervention components, such as real-time exercise monitoring and feedback as well as individualized support. The penetration and sustainability of cardiac telerehabilitation, as well as the perspectives of CR practitioners and health care organizations, have received little attention in existing cardiac telerehabilitation research. Experimental trials suggest that participants perceive cardiac telerehabilitation to be an acceptable and appropriate approach to improve the reach and utilization of CR, but pragmatic implementation studies are needed to understand how interventions can be sustainably translated from research into clinical practice. Addressing this gap could help realize the potential impact of telerehabilitation on CR accessibility and participation as well as person-centered, health, and economic outcomes. International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) CRD42019124254; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=124254.

Background This study describes patterns of adolescents’ objectively-measured sitting volume, sitting bouts, and breaks in sitting during different days and periods of the day, and explored differences by sex and weekdays versus weekend days. Methods Activ PAL™ data were collected in August 2014–December 2015 from adolescents attending secondary government schools in Melbourne Australia. Eight periods (early morning, mid-morning, morning break, late morning, lunch, early afternoon, late-afternoon and evening) were extracted for each day. School time, class time and out-of-school time were also extracted for weekdays. The percentage of time sitting, percentage of each hour in prolonged sitting (sitting bout ≥10 min), and number of sitting breaks/hour were calculated for each period. Differences by sex, and week and weekend days were determined using t-tests. Results Participants ( n  = 297, 15.4 ± 1.6 years) spent 68% of their day sitting; ~ 30% of each hour in prolonged sitting and 3.1 sitting breaks/hour. Sitting time was greater during class time (75%) and school (70%) compared to out-of-school time (65%). Sitting patterns differed between week and weekend days for all periods except the evening period. Girls had higher proportion of sitting during class than boys (76% vs 72% respectively) and school hours (72% vs 67%), more prolonged sitting during school hours (27% vs 23%), and more sitting breaks per hour during out-of-school time (2.6 vs 2.4), but fewer during class (2.5 vs 3.3) and school hours (2.7 vs 3.3). Sitting patterns did not differ by sex on weekend days. Conclusions Adolescents spent two-thirds of their waking hours sitting, with distinct patterns on weekdays and weekend days. Even though boys and girls were exposed to the same school day routine, girls spent more time sitting and had fewer sitting breaks. Class times, school breaks and the evening period were identified as key intervention periods. Further research is needed to understand the behavioural differences, and guide future intervention design.

Background Gender-based violence (GBV) is associated with high rates of psychopathology (i.e., depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder) in victim-survivors. Existing research has demonstrated that physical activity is beneficial for mental health and wellbeing across various populations. However, it is currently unclear whether moderate-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) is efficacious for victim-survivors of GBV. Therefore, this systematic review aims to understand 1) the acceptability and feasibility of leisure-time MVPA interventions for victim-survivors of GBV, 2) the efficacy of leisure-time MVPA interventions for mental health and wellbeing in this cohort, and 3) the implementation strategies used in the development of such interventions. Methods Four databases were searched from inception to January 2024. Leisure-time MVPA intervention studies that reported on at least one measure of mental health or wellbeing for self-identified/biological women who had lived experience of GBV were eligible. Results Eleven studies met inclusion criteria, and analysis revealed a range of different types of MVPA ( n  = 5) and mental health/wellbeing outcomes measured ( n  = 9). The main findings include: 1) feasibility and acceptability of MVPA for victim-survivors was enhanced where trauma and violence-informed (TVI) practices were used in the development and delivery of interventions. 2) There was a lack of clarity and consistency around TVI practice in physical activity intervention research. 3) Leisure-time MVPA may be positively associated with mental health and wellbeing. Conclusions Limited evidence exists regarding the impact of MVPA on mental health and wellbeing for this important population group. Future studies should embed TVI strategy within the design, delivery, and implementation of interventions.

IntroductionTransformUs is a multicomponent school-based programme that offers teachers professional learning and resources aligned with the Australian curriculum to promote physically active teaching and learning, a supportive environment and physical activity opportunities during recess and lunch. The programme was originally developed for students in mainstream primary schools and has been proven efficacious for increasing physical activity and reducing sedentary behaviour in children without disability. The programme has been adapted for delivery with students with disabilities in primary and secondary schools (TransformUs All Abilities). This project aims to determine the implementation at scale and effectiveness of the TransformUs All Abilities programme to increase physical activity among primary and secondary school children and adolescents with disability. This protocol describes the hybrid implementation-effectiveness trial that will be used for this evaluation.Methods and analysisThis study employs a hybrid type II implementation-effectiveness trial to evaluate the TransformUs All Abilities programme, targeting all government and independent, primary and secondary schools in Victoria, as well as special and mainstream secondary schools in Queensland and South Australia (n=2173 eligible schools). The effectiveness trial will focus on a subgroup of government/independent special schools for students with mild to moderate intellectual disability in Victoria, involving up to three intervention and three waitlist control schools (n=61 eligible schools). In both trials, outcomes will be guided by the RE-AIM framework focusing on reach, adoption and implementation (implementation trial) and effectiveness (effectiveness trial), with data collected at baseline and 6 months. The effectiveness trial will focus on students’ device-measured physical activity and sedentary behaviour—primary outcomes—and sleep, physical literacy and cognitive functions—secondary outcomes. Teacher feedback on the programme’s adaptation and their experience with programme implementation will also be collected, alongside qualitative feedback from a subsample of students regarding engagement/enjoyment and suggestions for improvements. Implementation data will be analysed descriptively and using linear mixed models to test changes over time. Effectiveness outcomes will be analysed using linear mixed models to compare intervention and waitlist control, accounting for confounding and school/classroom clustering. Interview data will be thematically analysed.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval for this trial was obtained from the Deakin University Human Research Ethics Committee (2021-368). Clearance to conduct research in schools was also obtained from the Education Departments of Victoria (2023-004726), Queensland (550/27/2592) and South Australia (2022-0020). Informed consent is required for participation in the study. School staff can enrol in the implementation trial via the TransformUs website, while the effectiveness trial requires organisational, staff, parental/carer consent and student assent. Results will be disseminated through academic publications, scientific conference presentations and summary reports to schools, parents and partner organisations.Trial registrationACTRN12622001082796; Universal Trial Number: U1111-1281-1103; ACTRN12622001050741: U1111-1280-8828.

Background Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are the leading causes of death worldwide. Systems approaches have potential for creating sustainable outcomes at scale but have rarely been used to support scale up in physical activity/nutrition promotion or NCD prevention more generally. This review aimed to: (i) synthesise evidence on the use of systems approaches in scaling up interventions targeting four behavioural risk factors for NCDs; and (ii) to explore how systems approaches have been conceptualised and used in intervention implementation and scale up. Method Seven electronic databases were searched for studies published 2016–2021. Eligible studies targeted at least one of four NCD behavioural risk factors (physical inactivity, tobacco use, alcohol consumption, diet), or described evaluation of an intervention planned for or scaled up. Studies were categorised as having a (i) high , (ii) moderate , or (iii) no use of a systems approach. A narrative synthesis of how systems approaches had been operationalised in scale up, following PRISMA guidelines. Results Twenty-one intervention studies were included. Only 19% ( n  = 4) of interventions explicitly used systems thinking to inform intervention design, implementation and scale up (targeting all four risk factors n  = 2, diet n  = 1, tobacco use n  = 1). Five studies (‘high use’) planned and implemented scale up with an explicit focus on relations between system elements and used system changes to drive impact at scale. Seven studies (‘moderate use’) considered systems elements impacting scale-up processes or outcomes but did not require achieving system-level changes from the outset. Nine studies (‘no use’) were designed to work at multiple levels among multiple agencies in an intervention setting, but the complexity of the system and relations between system elements was not articulated. We synthesised reported barriers and facilitators to scaling up, and how studies within each group conceptualised and used systems approaches, and methods, frameworks and principles for scaling up. Conclusion In physical activity research, and NCD prevention more broadly, the use of systems approaches in scale up remains in its infancy. For researchers, practitioners and policymakers wishing to adopt systems approaches to intervention implementation at scale, guidance is needed on how to communicate and operationalise systems approaches in research and in practice. Trial registration PROSPERO (CRD42021287265).

Background Contextual influences on program implementation exist across micro (individual), meso (organization), and macro (government/environment) system levels, yet macro factors are less frequently explored in implementation research. This retrospective study explored differences in adoption across meso- and macro-system levels using data from the 2018–2022 state-wide hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial of TransformUs Primary , a whole-school physical activity intervention. Aims were to: (1) assess differences in contextual characteristics between adopting and non-adopting schools and implications for equity, and (2) assess associations between macro-level events and dissemination events with program adoption over time. Methods Descriptive statistics (number and %) and chi-squared tests were used to assess differences in contextual characteristics between adopting and non-adopting schools (Aim 1). A time-series analysis of daily data was used to explore associations between the number of dissemination events promoting program awareness (e.g., media, newsletters), macro-level policy events (e.g., education department policies), COVID-19-related remote/on-site learning periods, school term dates (i.e., during/outside of school term) and program adoption (i.e., the number of TransformUs Primary registrations per day) (Aim 2). Results No differences in either school type (i.e., primary, combined, or special) or community level socio-educational advantage between adopting ( n  = 519) and non-adopting schools ( n  = 1,423) were identified. A higher proportion of adopting schools were located in major cities (71.7% vs. 54.5%; chi-square p  < 0.001) and were government (public sector) schools (80.0% vs. 63.1%; chi-square p  < 0.001). Time-series analysis results indicated that the likelihood of adopting TransformUs Primary decreased from the date of program launch to the end of the scale-up period (IRR 0.999, 95% CI 0.999–1.000; p  < 0.005). Both school term date (IRR 5.95, 95% CI 4.78–7.41; p  < 0.001) and dissemination events (IRR 3.30, 95% CI 2.67–4.06; p  < 0.001) increased the likelihood of adopting TransformUs Primary. Results provided little evidence of an association between the number of policy events or COVID-19-related remote and on-site learning periods and adoption. Conclusions Select meso- and macro-level factors had an impact on TransformUs Primary adoption. Findings inform the need to work with stakeholders in scale-up to prioritize dissemination strategies that have a discernible impact on adoption above others and consider targeted efforts to reach regional/rural and non-government schools.