6533b825fe1ef96bd1282060

RESEARCH PRODUCT

Predicting physical activity in university students with disabilities: The role of social ecological barriers in the theory of planned behaviour

Kathleen A. Martin GinisJavier MonforteJosé Devís DevísVíctor Pérez-samaniegoJoan ÚBeda-colomer

subject

AdultMaleAdolescentUniversitiesPopulationPsychological interventionPhysical activityIntentionSocial EnvironmentYoung Adult03 medical and health sciences0302 clinical medicineSurveys and QuestionnairesHumansBehaviour change interventionsDisabled Persons030212 general & internal medicineStudentseducationPath analysis (statistics)Exerciseeducation.field_of_studyEcologyPublic Health Environmental and Occupational HealthTheory of planned behaviorSpanish versionGeneral MedicineMiddle AgedSelf EfficacyCross-Sectional StudiesAttitudeSpainFemalePsychological TheoryPsychology030217 neurology & neurosurgeryIntrapersonal communication

description

Abstract Background Even though university students with disabilities are less active than their peers without disabilities, there is scarce knowledge on the predictors of physical activity (PA) in this population. Objectives To predict PA in Spanish university students with disabilities using the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) and to examine the role of social ecological barriers within this theoretical framework. Methods Participants (N = 1079; Mean age = 40.12) for this cross-sectional study were recruited through the disability care services of 55 Spanish universities. The TPB constructs were assessed using a questionnaire. The Spanish short form of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire was used to measure PA and the reduced Spanish version of the Barriers to Physical Activity for People with Mobility Impairments was used to measure social ecological barriers. Results Two different models were computed through path analysis. Model 1 included the traditional TPB constructs and model 2 added a social ecological barriers variable. In both models, attitudes ( β  = 0.152; β  = 0.152), subjective norms ( β  = 0.114; β  = 0.115) and self-efficacy ( β  = 0.657; β  = 0.659) each predicted PA intentions. PA intentions ( β  = 0.118; β  = 0.122), self-efficacy ( β  = 0.225; β  = 0.207) and controllability ( β  = 0.098; β  = 0.075) predicted PA. In model 2, social ecological barriers predicted PA ( β  = 0.099). Regression analyses revealed intrapersonal barriers as a significant predictor of self-efficacy ( β  = −0.441). Controllability was predicted by intrapersonal barriers ( β  = −0.265), community barriers ( β  = −0.100) and organizational barriers ( β  = −0.095). Conclusions Future PA behaviour change interventions should target intentions, self-efficacy and controllability, since they directly predicted PA. These interventions would benefit from considering social ecological barriers to PA.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dhjo.2019.06.008