King's College London

Research portal

Specifying the content of home-based health behaviour change interventions for older people with frailty or at risk of frailty: an exploratory systematic review

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Benjamin Gardner ; Ana Jovicic ; Celia Belk ; Kalpa Kharicha ; Steve Iliffe ; Jill Manthorpe ; Claire Goodman ; Vari M Drennan ; Kate Walters

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)e014127
JournalBMJ open
Volume7
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 9 Feb 2017

King's Authors

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To identify trials of home-based health behaviour change interventions for frail older people, describe intervention content and explore its potential contribution to intervention effects.

DESIGN: 15 bibliographic databases, and reference lists and citations of key papers, were searched for randomised controlled trials of home-based behavioural interventions reporting behavioural or health outcomes.

SETTING: Participants' homes.

PARTICIPANTS: Community-dwelling adults aged ≥65 years with frailty or at risk of frailty.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Trials were coded for effects on thematically clustered behavioural, health and well-being outcomes. Intervention content was described using 96 behaviour change techniques, and 9 functions (eg, education, environmental restructuring).

RESULTS: 19 eligible trials reported 22 interventions. Physical functioning was most commonly assessed (19 interventions). Behavioural outcomes were assessed for only 4 interventions. Effectiveness on most outcomes was limited, with at most 50% of interventions showing potential positive effects on behaviour, and 42% on physical functioning. 3 techniques (instruction on how to perform behaviour, adding objects to environment, restructuring physical environment) and 2 functions (education and enablement) were more commonly found in interventions showing potential than those showing no potential to improve physical function. Intervention content was not linked to effectiveness on other outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS: Interventions appeared to have greatest impact on physical function where they included behavioural instructions, environmental modification and practical social support. Yet, mechanisms of effects are unclear, because impact on behavioural outcomes has rarely been considered. Moreover, the robustness of our findings is also unclear, because interventions have been poorly reported. Greater engagement with behavioural science is needed when developing and evaluating home-based health interventions.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: ID=CRD42014010370.

View graph of relations

© 2015 King's College London | Strand | London WC2R 2LS | England | United Kingdom | Tel +44 (0)20 7836 5454