Motivational Interviewing Effects on Positive Airway Pressure Therapy (PAP) Adherence: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS ACS Applied Bio Materials Pub Date : 2023-07-01 DOI:10.1080/15402002.2022.2108033
Eric S Crosby, Elizabeth G Spitzer, Jan Kavookjian
{"title":"Motivational Interviewing Effects on Positive Airway Pressure Therapy (PAP) Adherence: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.","authors":"Eric S Crosby,&nbsp;Elizabeth G Spitzer,&nbsp;Jan Kavookjian","doi":"10.1080/15402002.2022.2108033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis examined Motivational Interviewing (MI) effects on positive airway pressure (PAP) adherence and related outcomes.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Medline, CIHANL, Psych Info, Web of Science, PubMed, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for randomized controlled trials published from peer-reviewed journals in English from 1990 to 2021 that compared objective PAP adherence among adults with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in a MI and non-MI intervention. A random effects meta-analysis model was completed at the 1-to-2-week, and 1-, 2-, 3-, and 12-month follow-up, and risk of bias was analyzed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In 10 trials of naïve PAP users and one trial of non-naïve PAP users, 14 to 277 middle-aged adults with moderate-to-severe OSA generally engaged in a brief, individual, face-to-face, MI intervention with standard care or a control condition. Several trials of naïve PAP users demonstrated that MI increased PAP use 1-2.6 hours per night, but a similar number of trials showed comparable conditions. Secondary outcomes were mixed. Among non-naïve PAP users, MI did not significantly increase adherence or secondary outcomes. The meta-analysis of PAP-naïve participants revealed that MI had a small to moderate significant effect on PAP adherence at 1, 2, and 3 months after beginning PAP (Hedges' g = 0.38 to 0.48; 95% CI = 0.04, 0.75) compared to standard care alone.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite heterogeneity, MI moderately increased PAP adherence among PAP-naïve adults with moderate-to-severe OSA, suggesting an effective strategy for short-term (1-3 months) adherence.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15402002.2022.2108033","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objectives: This systematic review and meta-analysis examined Motivational Interviewing (MI) effects on positive airway pressure (PAP) adherence and related outcomes.

Method: Medline, CIHANL, Psych Info, Web of Science, PubMed, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for randomized controlled trials published from peer-reviewed journals in English from 1990 to 2021 that compared objective PAP adherence among adults with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in a MI and non-MI intervention. A random effects meta-analysis model was completed at the 1-to-2-week, and 1-, 2-, 3-, and 12-month follow-up, and risk of bias was analyzed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool.

Results: In 10 trials of naïve PAP users and one trial of non-naïve PAP users, 14 to 277 middle-aged adults with moderate-to-severe OSA generally engaged in a brief, individual, face-to-face, MI intervention with standard care or a control condition. Several trials of naïve PAP users demonstrated that MI increased PAP use 1-2.6 hours per night, but a similar number of trials showed comparable conditions. Secondary outcomes were mixed. Among non-naïve PAP users, MI did not significantly increase adherence or secondary outcomes. The meta-analysis of PAP-naïve participants revealed that MI had a small to moderate significant effect on PAP adherence at 1, 2, and 3 months after beginning PAP (Hedges' g = 0.38 to 0.48; 95% CI = 0.04, 0.75) compared to standard care alone.

Conclusions: Despite heterogeneity, MI moderately increased PAP adherence among PAP-naïve adults with moderate-to-severe OSA, suggesting an effective strategy for short-term (1-3 months) adherence.

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
动机访谈对气道正压治疗依从性的影响:随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。
目的:本系统综述和荟萃分析检验了动机性访谈(MI)对气道正压(PAP)依从性和相关结果的影响。方法:检索Medline、CIHANL、Psych Info、Web of Science、PubMed和Cochrane系统评价数据库,检索1990年至2021年发表在同行评审的英文期刊上的随机对照试验,比较心肌梗死和非心肌梗死干预下阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停(OSA)成人患者的客观PAP依从性。随访1 ~ 2周,随访1、2、3、12个月完成随机效应荟萃分析模型,使用Cochrane risk of bias Tool分析偏倚风险。结果:在10项naïve PAP使用者试验和1项non-naïve PAP使用者试验中,14至277名患有中重度OSA的中年人通常在标准护理或对照条件下进行了简短的、个人的、面对面的心肌梗死干预。几项针对naïve PAP使用者的试验表明,心肌梗死增加了每晚1-2.6小时的PAP使用,但类似数量的试验显示了类似的情况。次要结果好坏参半。在non-naïve PAP使用者中,心肌梗死没有显著增加依从性或次要结局。PAP-naïve参与者的荟萃分析显示,心肌梗死对PAP开始后1、2和3个月的PAP依从性有小到中度的显著影响(Hedges' g = 0.38至0.48;95% CI = 0.04, 0.75)。结论:尽管存在异质性,心肌梗死中度增加了PAP-naïve中重度OSA成人患者的PAP依从性,提示短期(1-3个月)依从性的有效策略。
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
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
期刊最新文献
A Systematic Review of Sleep Disturbance in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension. Advancing Patient Education in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension: The Promise of Large Language Models. Anti-Myelin-Associated Glycoprotein Neuropathy: Recent Developments. Approach to Managing the Initial Presentation of Multiple Sclerosis: A Worldwide Practice Survey. Association Between LACE+ Index Risk Category and 90-Day Mortality After Stroke.
×
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