针对智障成人的生活方式调整干预:干预和组成部分层面的系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 2.1 2区 医学 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Journal of Intellectual Disability Research Pub Date : 2024-02-27 DOI:10.1111/jir.13098
D. Rana, S. Westrop, N. Jaiswal, E. Germeni, A. McGarty, L. Ells, P. Lally, M. McEwan, C. Melville, L. Harris, O. Wu
{"title":"针对智障成人的生活方式调整干预:干预和组成部分层面的系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"D. Rana,&nbsp;S. Westrop,&nbsp;N. Jaiswal,&nbsp;E. Germeni,&nbsp;A. McGarty,&nbsp;L. Ells,&nbsp;P. Lally,&nbsp;M. McEwan,&nbsp;C. Melville,&nbsp;L. Harris,&nbsp;O. Wu","doi":"10.1111/jir.13098","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Adults with intellectual disabilities (IDs) are susceptible to multiple health risk behaviours such as alcohol consumption, smoking, low physical activity, sedentary behaviour and poor diet. Lifestyle modification interventions can prevent or reduce negative health consequences caused by these behaviours. We aim to determine the effectiveness of lifestyle modification interventions and their components in targeting health risk behaviours in adults with IDs.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted. Electronic databases, clinical trial registries, grey literature and citations of systematic reviews and included studies were searched in January 2021 (updated February 2022). Randomised controlled trials and non-randomised controlled trials targeting alcohol consumption, smoking, low physical activity, sedentary behaviours and poor diet in adults (aged ≥ 18 years) with ID were included. Meta-analysis was conducted at the intervention level (pairwise and network meta-analysis) and the component-level (component network meta-analysis). Studies were coded using Michie's 19-item theory coding scheme and 94-item behaviour change taxonomies. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias (ROB) Version 2 and Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I). The study involved a patient and public involvement (PPI) group, including people with lived experience, who contributed extensively by shaping the methodology, providing valuable insights in interpreting results and organising of dissemination events.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Our literature search identified 12 180 articles, of which 80 studies with 4805 participants were included in the review. The complexity of lifestyle modification intervention was dismantled by identifying six core components that influenced outcomes. Interventions targeting single or multiple health risk behaviours could have a single or combination of multiple core-components. Interventions (2 RCTS; 4 non-RCTs; 228 participants) targeting alcohol consumption and smoking behaviour were effective but based on limited evidence. Similarly, interventions targeting low physical activity only (16 RCTs; 17 non-RCTs; 1413 participants) or multiple behaviours (low physical activity only, sedentary behaviours and poor diet) (17 RCTs; 24 non-RCTs; 3164 participants) yielded mixed effectiveness in outcomes. Most interventions targeting low physical activity only or multiple behaviours generated positive effects on various outcomes while some interventions led to no change or worsened outcomes, which could be attributed to the presence of a single core-component or a combination of similar core components in interventions. The intervention-level meta-analysis for weight management outcomes showed that none of the interventions were associated with a statistically significant change in outcomes when compared with treatment-as-usual and each other. Interventions with core-components combination of energy deficit diet, aerobic exercise and behaviour change techniques showed the highest weight loss [mean difference (MD) = −3.61, 95% credible interval (CrI) −9.68 to 1.95] and those with core-components combination dietary advice and aerobic exercise showed a weight gain (MD 0.94, 95% CrI −3.93 to 4.91). Similar findings were found with the component network meta-analysis for which additional components were identified. Most studies had a high and moderate risk of bias. Various theories and behaviour change techniques were used in intervention development and adaptation.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Our systematic review is the first to comprehensively explore lifestyle modification interventions targeting a range of single and multiple health risk behaviours in adults with ID, co-produced with people with lived experience. It has practical implications for future research as it highlights the importance of mixed-methods research in understanding lifestyle modification interventions and the need for population-specific improvements in the field (e.g., tailored interventions, development of evaluation instruments or tools, use of rigorous research methodologies and comprehensive reporting frameworks). Wide dissemination of related knowledge and the involvement of PPI groups, including people with lived experience, will help future researchers design interventions that consider the unique needs, desires and abilities of people with ID.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":16163,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intellectual Disability Research","volume":"68 5","pages":"387-445"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jir.13098","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lifestyle modification interventions for adults with intellectual disabilities: systematic review and meta-analysis at intervention and component levels\",\"authors\":\"D. Rana,&nbsp;S. Westrop,&nbsp;N. Jaiswal,&nbsp;E. Germeni,&nbsp;A. McGarty,&nbsp;L. Ells,&nbsp;P. Lally,&nbsp;M. McEwan,&nbsp;C. Melville,&nbsp;L. Harris,&nbsp;O. Wu\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jir.13098\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Adults with intellectual disabilities (IDs) are susceptible to multiple health risk behaviours such as alcohol consumption, smoking, low physical activity, sedentary behaviour and poor diet. Lifestyle modification interventions can prevent or reduce negative health consequences caused by these behaviours. We aim to determine the effectiveness of lifestyle modification interventions and their components in targeting health risk behaviours in adults with IDs.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted. Electronic databases, clinical trial registries, grey literature and citations of systematic reviews and included studies were searched in January 2021 (updated February 2022). Randomised controlled trials and non-randomised controlled trials targeting alcohol consumption, smoking, low physical activity, sedentary behaviours and poor diet in adults (aged ≥ 18 years) with ID were included. Meta-analysis was conducted at the intervention level (pairwise and network meta-analysis) and the component-level (component network meta-analysis). Studies were coded using Michie's 19-item theory coding scheme and 94-item behaviour change taxonomies. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias (ROB) Version 2 and Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I). The study involved a patient and public involvement (PPI) group, including people with lived experience, who contributed extensively by shaping the methodology, providing valuable insights in interpreting results and organising of dissemination events.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Our literature search identified 12 180 articles, of which 80 studies with 4805 participants were included in the review. The complexity of lifestyle modification intervention was dismantled by identifying six core components that influenced outcomes. Interventions targeting single or multiple health risk behaviours could have a single or combination of multiple core-components. Interventions (2 RCTS; 4 non-RCTs; 228 participants) targeting alcohol consumption and smoking behaviour were effective but based on limited evidence. Similarly, interventions targeting low physical activity only (16 RCTs; 17 non-RCTs; 1413 participants) or multiple behaviours (low physical activity only, sedentary behaviours and poor diet) (17 RCTs; 24 non-RCTs; 3164 participants) yielded mixed effectiveness in outcomes. Most interventions targeting low physical activity only or multiple behaviours generated positive effects on various outcomes while some interventions led to no change or worsened outcomes, which could be attributed to the presence of a single core-component or a combination of similar core components in interventions. The intervention-level meta-analysis for weight management outcomes showed that none of the interventions were associated with a statistically significant change in outcomes when compared with treatment-as-usual and each other. Interventions with core-components combination of energy deficit diet, aerobic exercise and behaviour change techniques showed the highest weight loss [mean difference (MD) = −3.61, 95% credible interval (CrI) −9.68 to 1.95] and those with core-components combination dietary advice and aerobic exercise showed a weight gain (MD 0.94, 95% CrI −3.93 to 4.91). Similar findings were found with the component network meta-analysis for which additional components were identified. Most studies had a high and moderate risk of bias. Various theories and behaviour change techniques were used in intervention development and adaptation.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>Our systematic review is the first to comprehensively explore lifestyle modification interventions targeting a range of single and multiple health risk behaviours in adults with ID, co-produced with people with lived experience. It has practical implications for future research as it highlights the importance of mixed-methods research in understanding lifestyle modification interventions and the need for population-specific improvements in the field (e.g., tailored interventions, development of evaluation instruments or tools, use of rigorous research methodologies and comprehensive reporting frameworks). Wide dissemination of related knowledge and the involvement of PPI groups, including people with lived experience, will help future researchers design interventions that consider the unique needs, desires and abilities of people with ID.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16163,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Intellectual Disability Research\",\"volume\":\"68 5\",\"pages\":\"387-445\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jir.13098\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Intellectual Disability Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jir.13098\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SPECIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Intellectual Disability Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jir.13098","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:智障成人容易出现多种健康风险行为,如饮酒、吸烟、运动量少、久坐不动和饮食不当。改变生活方式的干预措施可以预防或减少这些行为对健康造成的负面影响。我们旨在确定针对智障成人健康风险行为的生活方式改变干预措施及其组成部分的有效性:方法:我们进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析。检索了 2021 年 1 月(2022 年 2 月更新)的电子数据库、临床试验登记簿、灰色文献以及系统综述和纳入研究的引文。纳入了针对智障成人(年龄≥ 18 岁)饮酒、吸烟、体力活动少、久坐不动行为和不良饮食习惯的随机对照试验和非随机对照试验。在干预水平(配对分析和网络荟萃分析)和成分水平(成分网络荟萃分析)上进行了荟萃分析。研究采用 Michie 的 19 项理论编码方案和 94 项行为改变分类标准进行编码。偏倚风险采用 Cochrane 第 2 版偏倚风险(ROB)和非随机干预研究偏倚风险(ROBINS-I)进行评估。患者和公众参与(PPI)小组也参与了这项研究,其中包括有亲身经历的人,他们通过制定研究方法做出了广泛贡献,在解释研究结果和组织传播活动方面提供了宝贵的见解:我们的文献检索发现了 12 180 篇文章,其中 80 项研究、4805 名参与者被纳入审查范围。通过确定影响结果的六个核心要素,我们分解了改变生活方式干预的复杂性。针对单个或多个健康风险行为的干预措施可以有一个或多个核心组成部分的组合。针对饮酒和吸烟行为的干预措施(2 项 RCTS;4 项非 RCTs;228 名参与者)是有效的,但依据的证据有限。同样,只针对低体力活动(16 项研究性对照试验;17 项非研究性对照试验;1413 名参与者)或多种行为(只针对低体力活动、久坐行为和不良饮食)(17 项研究性对照试验;24 项非研究性对照试验;3164 名参与者)的干预措施在结果上的有效性参差不齐。大多数只针对低体力活动或多种行为的干预措施对各种结果产生了积极影响,而一些干预措施则导致结果无变化或恶化,这可能是由于干预措施中存在单一核心成分或类似核心成分的组合。对体重管理结果进行的干预层面荟萃分析表明,与 "常规治疗 "和其他干预措施相比,没有一项干预措施能使结果发生统计学意义上的显著变化。以能量不足饮食、有氧运动和行为改变技术组合为核心成分的干预措施显示体重减轻幅度最大[平均差(MD)=-3.61,95%可信区间(CrI)-9.68 至 1.95],而以饮食建议和有氧运动组合为核心成分的干预措施显示体重增加(MD 0.94,95%可信区间-3.93 至 4.91)。成分网络荟萃分析也发现了类似的结果,并确定了更多的成分。大多数研究存在高度和中度偏倚风险。在制定和调整干预措施时,使用了各种理论和行为改变技术:我们的系统综述首次全面探讨了针对智障成人的一系列单一和多重健康风险行为的生活方式改变干预措施,并与有生活经验的人共同制定了干预措施。它对未来的研究具有实际意义,因为它强调了混合方法研究在理解生活方式调整干预措施方面的重要性,以及在该领域针对特定人群进行改进的必要性(例如,定制干预措施、开发评估工具或手段、使用严格的研究方法和全面的报告框架)。相关知识的广泛传播以及包括有生活经验者在内的 PPI 群体的参与,将有助于未来的研究人员在设计干预措施时考虑到智障人士的独特需求、愿望和能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Lifestyle modification interventions for adults with intellectual disabilities: systematic review and meta-analysis at intervention and component levels

Background

Adults with intellectual disabilities (IDs) are susceptible to multiple health risk behaviours such as alcohol consumption, smoking, low physical activity, sedentary behaviour and poor diet. Lifestyle modification interventions can prevent or reduce negative health consequences caused by these behaviours. We aim to determine the effectiveness of lifestyle modification interventions and their components in targeting health risk behaviours in adults with IDs.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted. Electronic databases, clinical trial registries, grey literature and citations of systematic reviews and included studies were searched in January 2021 (updated February 2022). Randomised controlled trials and non-randomised controlled trials targeting alcohol consumption, smoking, low physical activity, sedentary behaviours and poor diet in adults (aged ≥ 18 years) with ID were included. Meta-analysis was conducted at the intervention level (pairwise and network meta-analysis) and the component-level (component network meta-analysis). Studies were coded using Michie's 19-item theory coding scheme and 94-item behaviour change taxonomies. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias (ROB) Version 2 and Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I). The study involved a patient and public involvement (PPI) group, including people with lived experience, who contributed extensively by shaping the methodology, providing valuable insights in interpreting results and organising of dissemination events.

Results

Our literature search identified 12 180 articles, of which 80 studies with 4805 participants were included in the review. The complexity of lifestyle modification intervention was dismantled by identifying six core components that influenced outcomes. Interventions targeting single or multiple health risk behaviours could have a single or combination of multiple core-components. Interventions (2 RCTS; 4 non-RCTs; 228 participants) targeting alcohol consumption and smoking behaviour were effective but based on limited evidence. Similarly, interventions targeting low physical activity only (16 RCTs; 17 non-RCTs; 1413 participants) or multiple behaviours (low physical activity only, sedentary behaviours and poor diet) (17 RCTs; 24 non-RCTs; 3164 participants) yielded mixed effectiveness in outcomes. Most interventions targeting low physical activity only or multiple behaviours generated positive effects on various outcomes while some interventions led to no change or worsened outcomes, which could be attributed to the presence of a single core-component or a combination of similar core components in interventions. The intervention-level meta-analysis for weight management outcomes showed that none of the interventions were associated with a statistically significant change in outcomes when compared with treatment-as-usual and each other. Interventions with core-components combination of energy deficit diet, aerobic exercise and behaviour change techniques showed the highest weight loss [mean difference (MD) = −3.61, 95% credible interval (CrI) −9.68 to 1.95] and those with core-components combination dietary advice and aerobic exercise showed a weight gain (MD 0.94, 95% CrI −3.93 to 4.91). Similar findings were found with the component network meta-analysis for which additional components were identified. Most studies had a high and moderate risk of bias. Various theories and behaviour change techniques were used in intervention development and adaptation.

Conclusion

Our systematic review is the first to comprehensively explore lifestyle modification interventions targeting a range of single and multiple health risk behaviours in adults with ID, co-produced with people with lived experience. It has practical implications for future research as it highlights the importance of mixed-methods research in understanding lifestyle modification interventions and the need for population-specific improvements in the field (e.g., tailored interventions, development of evaluation instruments or tools, use of rigorous research methodologies and comprehensive reporting frameworks). Wide dissemination of related knowledge and the involvement of PPI groups, including people with lived experience, will help future researchers design interventions that consider the unique needs, desires and abilities of people with ID.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
5.60%
发文量
81
期刊介绍: The Journal of Intellectual Disability Research is devoted exclusively to the scientific study of intellectual disability and publishes papers reporting original observations in this field. The subject matter is broad and includes, but is not restricted to, findings from biological, educational, genetic, medical, psychiatric, psychological and sociological studies, and ethical, philosophical, and legal contributions that increase knowledge on the treatment and prevention of intellectual disability and of associated impairments and disabilities, and/or inform public policy and practice. Expert reviews on themes in which recent research has produced notable advances will be included. Such reviews will normally be by invitation.
期刊最新文献
Evaluating the Clinical Applicability of Multifrequency Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis for Nutritional Status Prediction in Hospitalized Persons With Severe Motor and Intellectual Disabilities. Issue Information Comparative Analysis of Early Caregiver-Child Interaction Patterns in Infants and Toddlers: Evaluating Down Syndrome vs. Typical Development. Digit-in-Noise Test as a Hearing Screening Test for Individuals With Intellectual Disability. Real-Life Functioning in 22q11.2 Deletion Syndrome in Relation to Neurocognitive Abilities and Psychotic Symptoms: A Comparison With Idiopathic Schizophrenia.
×
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