The impact of the free swimming programme in a local community in the South East of England: giving with one hand, taking away with the other

Leisure centre entrance charges and physical activity participation in England

Reducing or eliminating the cost to the public of using leisure facilities is one tool that local authorities have available to reduce inequalities in physical activity (PA). There is limited evidence about the effect of leisure entrance charges and their impact on participation. This study aimed to ascertain how facility pricing influenced the decisions people made about how to pay and what to pay for and how, in turn, these decisions impacted on participation for different groups. A total of 83 members of the public living in 4 local authorities in the North West of England were involved in focus groups or individual interviews. The results show that cost was a key factor which influenced PA participation in low income neighbourhoods. In practise, however, the majority of service users navigated the range of prices or payment options to find one that was suitable rather than simply reporting whether leisure was affordable or not. Whilst pre-paid options (e.g. direct debit memberships) encouraged participation, entrance charges incurred each time an individual participated had a negative impact on frequency but were a convenient way of paying for occasional use or for people who were unable to afford a pre-paid option. Free access also helped people who could not afford pre-paid membership to exercise regularly as well as incentivizing non-users to try activities. The research concluded that policies that include components of free access and offer more flexible payment options are most likely to contribute to reducing inequalities in PA.

Using local authority entrance charges to tackle inequalities in physical activity? A qualitative study of leisure and public health perspectives

Background

Reducing or eliminating entrance charges for the public use of leisure facilities is one potential tool that local authorities (LA) have to reduce inequalities in physical activity (PA). Facility charges are likely to be a greater barrier to access for those who have lower incomes.

Methods

Semi-structured 1-to-1 and group interviews were conducted with 33 leisure and public health professionals in seven LAs in north-west England. We investigated how approaches to pricing varied in these settings and rationales influencing decision making.

Results

Welfare orientated (e.g. affordability) and commercial drivers (e.g. income generation) featured most prominently across areas. Pricing policies placed less direct focus on public health goals, although tackling inactivity was articulated as part of leisure's role more generally. Local targeting of free/concessionary offers was also defined and implemented differently. Decision makers described navigating competing pressures of providing services for the public 'good' yet remaining financially viable.

Conclusion

Many LAs are reviewing the extent of subsidy for facilities or are considering whether to invest public health budgets in leisure. The findings offer evidence of how pricing decisions are made and the approaches adopted in practice as well as the conflicting priorities for decision makers within an austerity context.

Context matters! sources of variability in weekend physical activity among families: a repeated measures study

Background

Family involvement is an essential component of effective physical activity (PA) interventions in children. However, little is known about the PA levels and characteristics of PA among families. This study used a repeated measures design and multiple data sources to explore the variability and characteristics of weekend PA among families.

Methods

Families (including a ‘target’ child aged 9–11 years, their primary caregiver(s) and siblings aged 6–8 years) were recruited through primary schools in Liverpool, UK. Participants completed a paper-based PA diary and wore an ActiGraph GT9X accelerometer on their left wrist for up to 16 weekend days. ActiGraph.csv files were analysed using the R-package GGIR version 1.1–4. Mean minutes of moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) for each weekend of measurement were calculated using linear mixed models, and variance components were estimated for participant (inter-individual), weekend of measurement, and residual error (intra-individual). Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated from the proportion of total variance accounted for by inter-individual sources, and used as a measure of reliability. Diary responses were summed to produce frequency counts. To offer contextual insight into weekend PA among family units, demographic, accelerometer, and diary data were combined to form two case studies representative of low and high active families.

Results

Twenty-five participants from 7 families participated, including 7 ‘target’ children (mean age 9.3 ± 1.1 years, 4 boys), 6 siblings (mean age 7.2 ± 0.7 years; 4 boys) and 12 adults (7 mothers and 5 fathers). There was a high degree of variability in target children’s (ICC = 0.55), siblings (ICC = 0.38), and mothers’ MVPA (ICC = 0.58), but not in fathers’ MVPA (ICC = 0.83). Children’s weekend PA was mostly unstructured in nature and undertaken with friends, whereas a greater proportion of parents’ weekend PA was undertaken alone in structured settings. The family case studies demonstrated that in the selected cases MVPA levels and variability across weekends were contingent on mode of PA participation.

Conclusions

These novel findings enhance understanding of the variability and characteristics of weekend PA among family units. The study demonstrates the utility of PA diaries in conjunction with accelerometers to provide understanding of the mode and contexts of out-of-school and family-based PA.