Trial feasibility and process evaluation of a motivationally-embellished group peer led walking intervention in retirement villages using the RE- AIM framework: the residents in action trial (RiAT)

Trial feasibility and process evaluation of a motivationally-embellished group peer led walking intervention in retirement villages using the RE- AIM framework: the residents in action trial (RiAT)

Objective: The Residents in Action Trial (RiAT; ACTRN12616001177448) was a 16-week motivationally-embellished peer-led walking intervention designed to increase walking, reduce sitting, and improve mental health and well-being in insufficiently active residents in retirement villages. In this paper we report on 1) trial feasibility and acceptability, and 2) evaluate the processes involved in the implementation of the intervention using the RE- AIM framework.

Method: A mixed methods design was employed, consisting of data from accelerometers, surveys, (individual, pair-based and focus group) interviews, and participant logbooks. Participants included 116 walkers (M(SD) age=78.37(8.30); 92% female), 8 peer leaders (i.e. ambassadors) and 3 retirement village managers from 14 retirement villages. Descriptives and linear mixed modelling were used to analyse the quantitative data and inductive thematic analyses were employed to analyse the interview data.

Results: The intended cluster randomised controlled design became quasi-experimental due to insufficient numbers of recruited ambassadors. The perceived burden of the number and frequency of research assessments was a frequently mentioned reason for a poor recruitment. Facilitators to walking maintenance were the use of self-monitoring, goal setting, social support, and having a routine. Reach was modest (about 14% of eligible participants were recruited from each village), but retention was excellent (92%). The motivational strategies taught appeared to have been implemented, at least in part, by the ambassadors. The walkers in the main experimental condition increased marginally their step counts, but there were no group differences on mental health and well-being outcomes, partly because of low statistical power.

Conclusions: Walkers and ambassadors who did take part in the study suggested that they enjoyed the programme and found it useful in terms of becoming more active and making social connections. However, the group format was not appealing to some participants, hence, other delivery options should be explored in the future.