Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Original research
Feasibility study of a co-designed, evidence-informed and community-based incentive intervention to promote healthy weight and well-being in disadvantaged communities in Scotland
  1. Julie Cowie1,
  2. Scott Findlay1,
  3. Rhonda Archibald2,
  4. Sinead Currie3,
  5. Pauline Campbell1,
  6. Danielle Hutcheon1,
  7. Marjon van der Pol4,
  8. Graeme MacLennan4,
  9. Elizabeth Cook5,
  10. Bette Lock6,
  11. Pat Hoddinott3
  1. 1 Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK
  2. 2 NHS Forth Valley, Stirling, UK
  3. 3 University of Stirling, Stirling, UK
  4. 4 University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
  5. 5 Westfield Park Community Centre, Westfield, UK
  6. 6 The Hope Hub, Denny, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Julie Cowie; julie.cowie{at}gcu.ac.uk

Abstract

Objectives To feasibility test a novel community-based financial incentive scheme to promote healthy weight and well-being.

Design Single-arm, prospective feasibility study using mixed methods.

Setting Two communities in Scotland experiencing high levels of disadvantage according to the Scottish Index for Multiple Deprivation (SIMD). Community C1 is in a large rural area with a small town centre (population~1.5K) and community C2 is a small and urban community (population~9K), enabling contextual comparison.

Participants Eligible adult (18 years or over) community members recruited through community outreach.

Intervention The Enjoy Life LocallY (ELLY) intervention comprised free soup twice weekly (café/delivery/pickup); loyalty card stamped for engagement in community assets (such as local activities, groups and clubs) exchanged for a £25 shopping card when a participant attends a minimum of 9 assets over 12 weeks; goal setting; information resources; self-monitoring of weight and well-being.

Outcomes Primary outcomes—feasibility of recruitment, retention and engagement. Acceptability of intervention components was assessed by self-reported questionnaires and interviews. Secondary outcomes—feasibility of collecting outcomes prioritised by communities for a future trial: health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L), mental well-being (WEMWBS), connectedness (Social Connectedness Scale) and weight-related measures (weight, body mass index (BMI)).

Results Over 3 months, 75 community citizens (35 citizens in C1, 40 citizens in C2) were recruited (125% of target recruitment of 60 participants (117% of 30 participants C1 target, 133% of 30 participants C2 target), 84% female, baseline weight mean (SD)=84.8 kg (20) and BMI mean (SD)=31.9 kg/m2 (7.3), 65/75 (87%) living in disadvantaged areas (SIMD quintiles 1–3)). Retention at 12 weeks, defined by completion of outcome measures at 12 weeks, was 65 (87%). Participation in at least one asset for a minimum of 9 out of 12 weeks of the intervention was achieved by 55 (73%). All intervention components were acceptable, with the loyalty card being the most popular and the soup cafés the least popular. The mean average cost of the soup ingredients, per participant, over the 12 weeks was £12.02. Outcome data showed a small decrease in weight and BMI and a small increase in health-related quality of life, mental well-being and social connectedness.

Conclusions The ELLY study recruited and retained participants from two disadvantaged communities in Scotland. The study was acceptable to participants and feasible to deliver. A full trial is warranted to determine effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, with consideration of scalability.

Trial registration number The ELLY feasibility study was not pre-registered.

  • Community-Based Participatory Research
  • PUBLIC HEALTH
  • Overweight

Data availability statement

Data are available upon reasonable request. All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request. Glasgow Caledonian University holds the copyright for the full interview transcripts and may grant data sharing permission on request.

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Data availability statement

Data are available upon reasonable request. All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request. Glasgow Caledonian University holds the copyright for the full interview transcripts and may grant data sharing permission on request.

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • X @Cowiejulie, @PCampbell48

  • Contributors JC, PH, SC, PC, GM, MvdP, RA and EC contributed to the study’s conception and design. JC was the principal investigator and project manager on this study. Data collection was conducted by SF, RA and JC. Data analysis was conducted by SF, DH, RA, GM, MvdP, JC and PH. JC, SF, RA and DH drafted the first version of the manuscript. JC led future iterations of the manuscript. All authors read and commented on the manuscript and approved the final version of it. The corresponding author attests that all authors meet authorship criteria and that nobody meeting the criteria has been omitted. JC is responsible for the overall content as the guarantor.

  • Funding Funding for the soup cafés was kindly provided by two local businesses (INEOS Group and Syngenta) located in one of our communities. Funding for the ELLY project was supported by the Chief Scientist Office (grant number: HIPS/21/32).

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient and public involvement Patients and/or the public were involved in the design, conduct, reporting or dissemination plans of this research. Refer to the Methods section for further details.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.