A randomised controlled trial of three very brief interventions for physical activity in primary care

Sally Pears; Maaike Bijker; Katie Morton; Joana Vasconcelos; Richard A. Parker; Kate Westgate; Soren Brage; Ed Wilson; A. Toby Prevost; Ann Louise Kinmonth; Simon Griffin; Stephen Sutton; Wendy Hardeman

doi:10.1186/s12889-016-3684-7

A randomised controlled trial of three very brief interventions for physical activity in primary care

Sally Pears, Maaike Bijker, Katie Morton, Joana Vasconcelos, Richard A. Parker, Kate Westgate, Soren Brage, Ed Wilson, A. Toby Prevost, Ann Louise Kinmonth, Simon Griffin, Stephen Sutton, Wendy Hardeman^*

^*Corresponding author for this work

Cicely Saunders Institute of Palliative Care, Policy & Rehabilitation

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

27 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Very brief interventions (VBIs) for physical activity are promising, but there is uncertainty about their potential effectiveness and cost. We assessed potential efficacy, feasibility, acceptability, and cost of three VBIs in primary care, in order to select the most promising intervention for evaluation in a subsequent large-scale RCT. Methods: Three hundred and ninety four adults aged 40-74 years were randomised to a Motivational (n = 83), Pedometer (n = 74), or Combined (n = 80) intervention, delivered immediately after a preventative health check in primary care, or control (Health Check only; n = 157). Potential efficacy was measured as the probability of a positive difference between an intervention arm and the control arm in mean physical activity, measured by accelerometry at 4 weeks. Results: For the primary outcome the estimated effect sizes (95 % CI) relative to the Control arm for the Motivational, Pedometer and Combined arms were respectively: +20.3 (−45.0, +85.7), +23.5 (−51.3, +98.3), and −3.1 (−69.3, +63.1) counts per minute. There was a73% probability of a positive effect on physical activity for each of the Motivational and Pedometer VBIs relative to control, but only 46 % for the Combined VBI. Only the Pedometer VBI was deliverable within 5 min. All VBIs were acceptable and low cost. Conclusions: Based on the four criteria, the Pedometer VBI was selected for evaluation in a large-scale trial. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN02863077 . Retrospectively registered 05/10/2012.

Original language	English
Article number	1033
Pages (from-to)	1-13
Number of pages	13
Journal	BMC Public Health
Volume	16
Issue number	1
Early online date	30 Sept 2016
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-016-3684-7
Publication status	Published - 30 Sept 2016

Keywords

Behaviour change techniques
Health promotion
Physical activity
Primary care
Public health
Very brief interventions

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1186/s12889-016-3684-7

Cite this

Pears, S., Bijker, M., Morton, K., Vasconcelos, J., Parker, R. A., Westgate, K., Brage, S., Wilson, E., Prevost, A. T., Kinmonth, A. L., Griffin, S., Sutton, S., & Hardeman, W. (2016). A randomised controlled trial of three very brief interventions for physical activity in primary care. BMC Public Health, 16(1), 1-13. Article 1033. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-016-3684-7

@article{bc936d723a93435abcfa6c5630e0324d,

title = "A randomised controlled trial of three very brief interventions for physical activity in primary care",

abstract = "Background: Very brief interventions (VBIs) for physical activity are promising, but there is uncertainty about their potential effectiveness and cost. We assessed potential efficacy, feasibility, acceptability, and cost of three VBIs in primary care, in order to select the most promising intervention for evaluation in a subsequent large-scale RCT. Methods: Three hundred and ninety four adults aged 40-74 years were randomised to a Motivational (n = 83), Pedometer (n = 74), or Combined (n = 80) intervention, delivered immediately after a preventative health check in primary care, or control (Health Check only; n = 157). Potential efficacy was measured as the probability of a positive difference between an intervention arm and the control arm in mean physical activity, measured by accelerometry at 4 weeks. Results: For the primary outcome the estimated effect sizes (95 % CI) relative to the Control arm for the Motivational, Pedometer and Combined arms were respectively: +20.3 (−45.0, +85.7), +23.5 (−51.3, +98.3), and −3.1 (−69.3, +63.1) counts per minute. There was a73% probability of a positive effect on physical activity for each of the Motivational and Pedometer VBIs relative to control, but only 46 % for the Combined VBI. Only the Pedometer VBI was deliverable within 5 min. All VBIs were acceptable and low cost. Conclusions: Based on the four criteria, the Pedometer VBI was selected for evaluation in a large-scale trial. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN02863077 . Retrospectively registered 05/10/2012.",

keywords = "Behaviour change techniques, Health promotion, Physical activity, Primary care, Public health, Very brief interventions",

author = "Sally Pears and Maaike Bijker and Katie Morton and Joana Vasconcelos and Parker, {Richard A.} and Kate Westgate and Soren Brage and Ed Wilson and Prevost, {A. Toby} and Kinmonth, {Ann Louise} and Simon Griffin and Stephen Sutton and Wendy Hardeman",

note = "Funding Information: This study was conducted on behalf of the Very Brief Interventions Programme team (see www.phpc.cam.ac.uk/pcu/research/research-projectslist/ vbi/vbi-research-team for team members). The authors would like to thank all participants and practitioners involved in this research, and Lewis Griffiths (MRC Epidemiology Unit) for his assistance with accelerometry data processing. This paper presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Programme Grants for Applied Research Programme (Grant Reference Number RP-PG-0608-10079). ATP and JV were supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust and King's College London. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health. The funder had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, the writing of the manuscript, and decision to submit the manuscript for publication. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2016 The Author(s). Copyright: Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.",

year = "2016",

month = sep,

day = "30",

doi = "10.1186/s12889-016-3684-7",

language = "English",

volume = "16",

pages = "1--13",

journal = "BMC Public Health",

issn = "1471-2458",

publisher = "BMC Health Services Research",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A randomised controlled trial of three very brief interventions for physical activity in primary care

AU - Pears, Sally

AU - Bijker, Maaike

AU - Morton, Katie

AU - Vasconcelos, Joana

AU - Parker, Richard A.

AU - Westgate, Kate

AU - Brage, Soren

AU - Wilson, Ed

AU - Prevost, A. Toby

AU - Kinmonth, Ann Louise

AU - Griffin, Simon

AU - Sutton, Stephen

AU - Hardeman, Wendy

N1 - Funding Information: This study was conducted on behalf of the Very Brief Interventions Programme team (see www.phpc.cam.ac.uk/pcu/research/research-projectslist/ vbi/vbi-research-team for team members). The authors would like to thank all participants and practitioners involved in this research, and Lewis Griffiths (MRC Epidemiology Unit) for his assistance with accelerometry data processing. This paper presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Programme Grants for Applied Research Programme (Grant Reference Number RP-PG-0608-10079). ATP and JV were supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust and King's College London. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health. The funder had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, the writing of the manuscript, and decision to submit the manuscript for publication. Publisher Copyright: © 2016 The Author(s). Copyright: Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.

PY - 2016/9/30

Y1 - 2016/9/30

N2 - Background: Very brief interventions (VBIs) for physical activity are promising, but there is uncertainty about their potential effectiveness and cost. We assessed potential efficacy, feasibility, acceptability, and cost of three VBIs in primary care, in order to select the most promising intervention for evaluation in a subsequent large-scale RCT. Methods: Three hundred and ninety four adults aged 40-74 years were randomised to a Motivational (n = 83), Pedometer (n = 74), or Combined (n = 80) intervention, delivered immediately after a preventative health check in primary care, or control (Health Check only; n = 157). Potential efficacy was measured as the probability of a positive difference between an intervention arm and the control arm in mean physical activity, measured by accelerometry at 4 weeks. Results: For the primary outcome the estimated effect sizes (95 % CI) relative to the Control arm for the Motivational, Pedometer and Combined arms were respectively: +20.3 (−45.0, +85.7), +23.5 (−51.3, +98.3), and −3.1 (−69.3, +63.1) counts per minute. There was a73% probability of a positive effect on physical activity for each of the Motivational and Pedometer VBIs relative to control, but only 46 % for the Combined VBI. Only the Pedometer VBI was deliverable within 5 min. All VBIs were acceptable and low cost. Conclusions: Based on the four criteria, the Pedometer VBI was selected for evaluation in a large-scale trial. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN02863077 . Retrospectively registered 05/10/2012.

AB - Background: Very brief interventions (VBIs) for physical activity are promising, but there is uncertainty about their potential effectiveness and cost. We assessed potential efficacy, feasibility, acceptability, and cost of three VBIs in primary care, in order to select the most promising intervention for evaluation in a subsequent large-scale RCT. Methods: Three hundred and ninety four adults aged 40-74 years were randomised to a Motivational (n = 83), Pedometer (n = 74), or Combined (n = 80) intervention, delivered immediately after a preventative health check in primary care, or control (Health Check only; n = 157). Potential efficacy was measured as the probability of a positive difference between an intervention arm and the control arm in mean physical activity, measured by accelerometry at 4 weeks. Results: For the primary outcome the estimated effect sizes (95 % CI) relative to the Control arm for the Motivational, Pedometer and Combined arms were respectively: +20.3 (−45.0, +85.7), +23.5 (−51.3, +98.3), and −3.1 (−69.3, +63.1) counts per minute. There was a73% probability of a positive effect on physical activity for each of the Motivational and Pedometer VBIs relative to control, but only 46 % for the Combined VBI. Only the Pedometer VBI was deliverable within 5 min. All VBIs were acceptable and low cost. Conclusions: Based on the four criteria, the Pedometer VBI was selected for evaluation in a large-scale trial. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN02863077 . Retrospectively registered 05/10/2012.

KW - Behaviour change techniques

KW - Health promotion

KW - Physical activity

KW - Primary care

KW - Public health

KW - Very brief interventions

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84990829867&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1186/s12889-016-3684-7

DO - 10.1186/s12889-016-3684-7

M3 - Article

C2 - 27716297

AN - SCOPUS:84990829867

SN - 1471-2458

VL - 16

SP - 1

EP - 13

JO - BMC Public Health

JF - BMC Public Health

IS - 1

M1 - 1033

ER -

A randomised controlled trial of three very brief interventions for physical activity in primary care

Abstract

Keywords

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this