IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i4p1720-d497305.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-Stakeholder Retrospective Acceptability of a Peer Support Intervention for Exercise Referral

Author

Listed:
  • Robert M. Portman

    (Health Research Institute, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk L39 4QP, UK
    Department of Sport and Physical Activity, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk L39 4QP, UK)

  • Andrew R. Levy

    (Health Research Institute, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk L39 4QP, UK
    Department of Psychology, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk L39 4QP, UK)

  • Anthony J. Maher

    (Department of Sport and Physical Activity, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk L39 4QP, UK
    Institute for Social Responsibility, Politics, Pedagogy and Practice in PE and Sport Research Group, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk L39 4QP, UK)

  • Stuart J. Fairclough

    (Health Research Institute, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk L39 4QP, UK
    Department of Sport and Physical Activity, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk L39 4QP, UK)

Abstract

Perceived social support opportunities are central to successful exercise referral scheme (ERS) client experiences. However, there remains a lack of guidance on how ERSs can embed social support opportunities within their provision. This study presents retrospective acceptability findings from a 12-week social-identity-informed peer support intervention to enhance perceived social support among clients of an English ERS. Five peer volunteers were recruited, trained, and deployed in supervised ERS sessions across two sites. Peers assisted exercise referral officers (EROs) by providing supplementary practical, informational, motivational, and emotional support to ERS clients. Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted with peers ( n = 4), EROs ( n = 2), and clients ( n = 5) and analysed thematically. The analysis identified three primary themes. The first theme detailed how EROs utilised peer volunteers to supplement the ERS client experience. This theme delineated peer roles within the ERS context and identified salient individual peer characteristics that contributed to their success. The second theme described peer acceptability among the various stakeholders. Peers were valued for their ability to reduce burden on EROs and to enhance perceptions of comfort among ERS clients. The final theme presented participant feedback regarding how the intervention may be further refined and enhanced. Peers represented a cost-effective and acceptable means of providing auxiliary social support to ERS clients. Moving forward, the structured integration of peers can improve the accessibility of social support among ERS participants, thus facilitating better rates of ERS completion.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert M. Portman & Andrew R. Levy & Anthony J. Maher & Stuart J. Fairclough, 2021. "Multi-Stakeholder Retrospective Acceptability of a Peer Support Intervention for Exercise Referral," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-16, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:4:p:1720-:d:497305
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/4/1720/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/4/1720/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lorthios-Guilledroit, Agathe & Richard, Lucie & Filiatrault, Johanne, 2018. "Factors associated with the implementation of community-based peer-led health promotion programs: A scoping review," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 19-33.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Guilhem Dardier & Françoise Jabot & Flora Pouliquen, 2021. "Can Air Quality Citizen-Sensors Turn into Clean Air Ambassadors? Insights from a Qualitative Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(19), pages 1-12, September.
    2. Keith James Topping, 2022. "Peer Education and Peer Counselling for Health and Well-Being: A Review of Reviews," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(10), pages 1-19, May.
    3. Soumyadeep Banerjee & Abid Hussain & Sabarnee Tuladhar & Arabinda Mishra, 2019. "Building capacities of women for climate change adaptation: Insights from migrant-sending households in Nepal," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 157(3), pages 587-609, December.
    4. Lawarée, Justin & Jacob, Steve & Ouimet, Mathieu, 2020. "A scoping review of knowledge syntheses in the field of evaluation across four decades of practice," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:4:p:1720-:d:497305. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.