A qualitative exploration of participants' experiences of taking part in a walking programme: Perceived benefits, barriers, choices and use of intervention resources.
Study Goal
The researchers aimed to explore the experiences of adults with intellectual disabilities participating in a walking programme (Walk Well) and assess its impact on physical activity.
Results Summary
Participants reported positive experiences with the programme, though not all showed significant increases in walking. Barriers included difficulties with self-monitoring and reliance on carers for support.
Population
Adults with intellectual disabilities.
Effective Dosage
Not specified.
Duration
Not specified.
Interactions
None mentioned.
| Intervention | Direction | Endpoint | Population | Dosage | Impact | Claim # |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
walking programmes | increase | physical activity | adults with intellectual disabilities | - | are an effective way to increase | #1 |
Walk Well walking programme | no change | walking | participants | - | not a significant increase in | #2 |
Walk Well walking programme | neutral | the programme | participants | - | reported positive experiences of taking part in | #3 |
BACKGROUND: Adults with intellectual disabilities (ID) experience significant inequalities and tend to be more sedentary and less physically active than the wider population. Walking programmes are an effective way to increase physical activity (PA) but have not been used in studies involving adults with intellectual disabilities. METHOD: Nineteen adults with intellectual disabilities participated in semistructured interviews or focus groups exploring their experiences of taking part in a walking programme (Walk Well). Data were coded using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Four overarching themes emerged: perceived benefits of taking part in the programme, perceived drawbacks/ barriers, walking choices and using the Walk Well resources. While there was not a significant increase in walking for all, the participants reported positive experiences of taking part in the programme. Self-monitoring proved difficult for some, particularly reading the daily step count recorded on the pedometer and writing it in the diary. Carers also played an important role in facilitating and preventing behaviour change in adults with intellectual disabilities. CONCLUSION: Additional barriers prevent many adults with intellectual disabilities from participating in PA. Capturing participant experiences provides important information for designing effective and equitable health improvement programmes.