Effectiveness of behavioural interventions with motivational interviewing on physical activity outcomes in adults: systematic review and meta-analysis

The BMJ Pub Date : 2024-07-10 DOI:10.1136/bmj-2023-078713
SuFen Zhu, Deepra Sinha, Megan Kirk, Moscho Michalopoulou, Anisa Hajizadeh, Gina Wren, Paul Doody, Lucy Mackillop, Ralph Smith, Susan A Jebb, Nerys M Astbury
{"title":"Effectiveness of behavioural interventions with motivational interviewing on physical activity outcomes in adults: systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"SuFen Zhu, Deepra Sinha, Megan Kirk, Moscho Michalopoulou, Anisa Hajizadeh, Gina Wren, Paul Doody, Lucy Mackillop, Ralph Smith, Susan A Jebb, Nerys M Astbury","doi":"10.1136/bmj-2023-078713","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of behavioural interventions that include motivational interviewing on physical activity outcomes in adults. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Study selection A search of seven databases for randomised controlled trials published from inception to 1 March 2023 comparing a behavioural intervention including motivational interviewing with a comparator without motivational interviewing on physical activity outcomes in adults. Outcomes of interest were differences in change in quantitative measures of total physical activity, moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA), and sedentary time. Data extraction and synthesis Two reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Population characteristics, intervention components, comparison groups, and outcomes of studies were summarised. For overall main effects, random effects meta-analyses were used to report standardised mean differences (SMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Differential effects based on duration of follow-up, comparator type, intervention duration, and disease or health condition of participants were also examined. Results 129 papers reporting 97 randomised controlled trials totalling 27 811 participants and 105 comparisons were included. Interventions including motivational interviewing were superior to comparators for increases in total physical activity (SMD 0.45, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.65, equivalent to 1323 extra steps/day; low certainty evidence) and MVPA (0.45, 0.19 to 0.71, equivalent to 95 extra min/week; very low certainty evidence) and for reductions in sedentary time (−0.58, −1.03 to −0.14, equivalent to −51 min/day; very low certainty evidence). Evidence for a difference in any outcome compared with comparators of similar intensity was lacking. The magnitude of effect diminished over time, and evidence of an effect of motivational interviewing beyond one year was lacking. Most interventions involved patients with a specific health condition, and evidence of an effect of motivational interviewing to increase MVPA or decrease sedentary time was lacking in general population samples. Conclusions Certainty of the evidence using motivational interviewing as part of complex behavioural interventions for promoting total physical activity in adults was low, and for MVPA and sedentary time was very low. The totality of evidence suggests that although interventions with motivational interviewing increase physical activity and decrease sedentary behaviour, no difference was found in studies where the effect of motivational interviewing could be isolated. Effectiveness waned over time, with no evidence of a benefit of motivational interviewing to increase physical activity beyond one year. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42020219881. The statistical code used in the analysis is available from <https://github.com/nerysastbury/MI_SR.git>.","PeriodicalId":22388,"journal":{"name":"The BMJ","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The BMJ","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2023-078713","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of behavioural interventions that include motivational interviewing on physical activity outcomes in adults. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Study selection A search of seven databases for randomised controlled trials published from inception to 1 March 2023 comparing a behavioural intervention including motivational interviewing with a comparator without motivational interviewing on physical activity outcomes in adults. Outcomes of interest were differences in change in quantitative measures of total physical activity, moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA), and sedentary time. Data extraction and synthesis Two reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Population characteristics, intervention components, comparison groups, and outcomes of studies were summarised. For overall main effects, random effects meta-analyses were used to report standardised mean differences (SMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Differential effects based on duration of follow-up, comparator type, intervention duration, and disease or health condition of participants were also examined. Results 129 papers reporting 97 randomised controlled trials totalling 27 811 participants and 105 comparisons were included. Interventions including motivational interviewing were superior to comparators for increases in total physical activity (SMD 0.45, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.65, equivalent to 1323 extra steps/day; low certainty evidence) and MVPA (0.45, 0.19 to 0.71, equivalent to 95 extra min/week; very low certainty evidence) and for reductions in sedentary time (−0.58, −1.03 to −0.14, equivalent to −51 min/day; very low certainty evidence). Evidence for a difference in any outcome compared with comparators of similar intensity was lacking. The magnitude of effect diminished over time, and evidence of an effect of motivational interviewing beyond one year was lacking. Most interventions involved patients with a specific health condition, and evidence of an effect of motivational interviewing to increase MVPA or decrease sedentary time was lacking in general population samples. Conclusions Certainty of the evidence using motivational interviewing as part of complex behavioural interventions for promoting total physical activity in adults was low, and for MVPA and sedentary time was very low. The totality of evidence suggests that although interventions with motivational interviewing increase physical activity and decrease sedentary behaviour, no difference was found in studies where the effect of motivational interviewing could be isolated. Effectiveness waned over time, with no evidence of a benefit of motivational interviewing to increase physical activity beyond one year. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42020219881. The statistical code used in the analysis is available from .
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
采用动机访谈法的行为干预对成人体育锻炼结果的影响:系统回顾与荟萃分析
目的 评估包括动机访谈在内的行为干预对成人体育锻炼结果的有效性。设计 系统综述和荟萃分析。研究选择 在七个数据库中检索了从开始到 2023 年 3 月 1 日期间发表的随机对照试验,这些试验比较了包含动机访谈的行为干预与不包含动机访谈的对比试验对成人体育锻炼结果的影响。所关注的结果是总体力活动量、中强度体力活动量(MVPA)和久坐时间的定量指标变化的差异。数据提取与综合 两名审稿人提取了数据并评估了偏倚风险。对研究的人群特征、干预内容、对比组和结果进行了总结。对于总体主要效应,采用随机效应荟萃分析来报告标准化均值差异(SMDs)和95%置信区间(CIs)。此外,还研究了基于随访时间、比较者类型、干预时间以及参与者疾病或健康状况的差异效应。结果 共纳入了 129 篇论文,报告了 97 项随机对照试验,共计 27 811 名参与者和 105 项比较结果。在增加总体力活动量(SMD 0.45,95% CI 0.33 至 0.65,相当于每天多走 1323 步;低确定性证据)和 MVPA(0.45,0.19 至 0.71,相当于每周多做 95 分钟;极低确定性证据)以及减少久坐时间(-0.58,-1.03 至 -0.14,相当于每天少做 51 分钟;极低确定性证据)方面,包括动机访谈在内的干预措施优于比较试验。没有证据表明与强度相似的比较者相比,任何结果都存在差异。随着时间的推移,效果会逐渐减弱,而且缺乏证据表明动机访谈在一年后仍有效果。大多数干预措施涉及特定健康状况的患者,而在普通人群样本中,缺乏激励访谈对增加 MVPA 或减少久坐时间的效果的证据。结论 使用动机访谈作为复杂行为干预措施的一部分来促进成人总体力活动的证据确定性较低,而对于 MVPA 和久坐时间的证据确定性非常低。全部证据表明,尽管采用动机访谈法进行干预能增加体育锻炼量并减少久坐行为,但在可将动机访谈法的效果分离出来的研究中,并没有发现任何差异。随着时间的推移,效果逐渐减弱,没有证据表明动机访谈在一年后对增加体育锻炼有益。系统综述注册号为 PROSPERO CRD42020219881。分析中使用的统计代码可从以下网址获取。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
John Peter English Satish Chander Chib None of us are prepared unless all of us are prepared: research for the next health shock must be inclusive and equitable Social care research: international cooperation is vital to prepare for future health shocks Infectious diseases are being allowed to run rampant in Gaza
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1