Dataset Information

Incorporating a brief intervention for personalised cancer risk assessment to promote behaviour change into primary care: a multi-methods pilot study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Approximately 40% of cancers could be prevented if people lived healthier lifestyles. We have developed a theory-based brief intervention to share personalised cancer risk information and promote behaviour change within primary care. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and acceptability of incorporating this intervention into primary care consultations.

Method

Patients eligible for an NHS Health Check or annual chronic disease review at five general practices were invited to participate in a non-randomised pilot study. In addition to the NHS Health Check or chronic disease review, those receiving the intervention were provided with their estimated risk of developing the most common preventable cancers alongside tailored behaviour change advice. Patients completed online questionnaires at baseline, immediately post-consultation and at 3-month follow-up. Consultations were audio/video recorded. Patients (n?=?12) and healthcare professionals (HCPs) (n?=?7) participated in post-intervention qualitative interviews that were analysed using thematic analysis.

Results

62 patients took part. Thirty-four attended for an NHS Health Check plus the intervention; 7 for a standard NHS Health Check; 16 for a chronic disease review plus the intervention; and 5 for a standard chronic disease review. The mean time for delivery of the intervention was 9.6?min (SD 3) within NHS Health Checks and 9?min (SD 4) within chronic disease reviews. Fidelity of delivery of the intervention was high. Data from the questionnaires demonstrates potential improvements in health-related behaviours following the intervention. Patients receiving the intervention found the cancer risk information and lifestyle advice understandable, useful and motivating. HCPs felt that the intervention fitted well within NHS Health Checks and facilitated conversations around behaviour change. Integrating the intervention within chronic disease reviews was more challenging.

Conclusions

Incorporating a risk-based intervention to promote behaviour change for cancer prevention into primary care consultations is feasible and acceptable to both patients and HCPs. A randomised trial is now needed to assess the effect on health behaviours. When designing that trial, and other prevention activities within primary care, it is necessary to consider challenges around patient recruitment, the HCP contact time needed for delivery of interventions, and how best to integrate discussions about disease risk within routine care.

SUBMITTER: Mills K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7824918 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Incorporating a brief intervention for personalised cancer risk assessment to promote behaviour change into primary care: a multi-methods pilot study.

Mills Katie K Paxton Ben B Walter Fiona M FM Griffin Simon J SJ Sutton Stephen S Usher-Smith Juliet A JA

BMC public health 20210123 1

<h4>Background</h4>Approximately 40% of cancers could be prevented if people lived healthier lifestyles. We have developed a theory-based brief intervention to share personalised cancer risk information and promote behaviour change within primary care. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and acceptability of incorporating this intervention into primary care consultations.<h4>Method</h4>Patients eligible for an NHS Health Check or annual chronic disease review at five general practices wer ...[more]

PMID: 33485309

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Cancer is the second leading cause of death worldwide. Lifestyle choices play an important role in the aetiology of cancer with up to 4 in 10 cases potentially preventable. Interventions delivered by healthcare professionals (HCPs) that incorporate risk information have the potential to promote behaviour change. Our aim was to develop a very brief intervention incorporating cancer risk, which could be implemented within primary care. METHODS:Guided by normalisation process theory (NPT), we developed a prototype intervention using literature reviews, consultation with patient and public representatives and pilot work with patients and HCPs. We conducted focus groups and interviews with 65 HCPs involved in delivering prevention activities. Findings were used to refine the intervention before 22 HCPs completed an online usability test and provided further feedback via a questionnaire incorporating a modified version of the NoMAD checklist. RESULTS:The intervention included a website where individuals could provide information on lifestyle risk factors view their estimated 10-year risk of developing one or more of the five most common preventable cancers and access lifestyle advice incorporating behaviour change techniques. Changes incorporated from feedback from the focus groups and interviews included signposting to local services and websites, simplified wording and labelling of risk information. In the usability testing, all participants felt it would be easy to collect the risk information. Ninety-one percent felt the intervention would enable discussion about cancer risk and believed it had potential to be easily integrated into National Health Service (NHS) Health Checks. However, only 36% agreed it could be delivered within 5 min. CONCLUSIONS:With the use of NPT, we developed a very brief intervention that is acceptable to HCPs in primary care and could be potentially integrated into NHS Health Checks. However, further work is needed to assess its feasibility and potential effectiveness.

Project description:In this paper, we introduce the Intervention Mapping (IM) taxonomy of behaviour change methods and its potential to be developed into a coding taxonomy. That is, although IM and its taxonomy of behaviour change methods are not in fact new, because IM was originally developed as a tool for intervention development, this potential was not immediately apparent. Second, in explaining the IM taxonomy and defining the relevant constructs, we call attention to the existence of parameters for effectiveness of methods, and explicate the related distinction between theory-based methods and practical applications and the probability that poor translation of methods may lead to erroneous conclusions as to method-effectiveness. Third, we recommend a minimal set of intervention characteristics that may be reported when intervention descriptions and evaluations are published. Specifying these characteristics can greatly enhance the quality of our meta-analyses and other literature syntheses. In conclusion, the dynamics of behaviour change are such that any taxonomy of methods of behaviour change needs to acknowledge the importance of, and provide instruments for dealing with, three conditions for effectiveness for behaviour change methods. For a behaviour change method to be effective: (1) it must target a determinant that predicts behaviour; (2) it must be able to change that determinant; (3) it must be translated into a practical application in a way that preserves the parameters for effectiveness and fits with the target population, culture, and context. Thus, taxonomies of methods of behaviour change must distinguish the specific determinants that are targeted, practical, specific applications, and the theory-based methods they embody. In addition, taxonomies should acknowledge that the lists of behaviour change methods will be used by, and should be used by, intervention developers. Ideally, the taxonomy should be readily usable for this goal; but alternatively, it should be clear how the information in the taxonomy can be used in practice. The IM taxonomy satisfies these requirements, and it would be beneficial if other taxonomies would be extended to also meet these needs.

Project description:[Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported online in Journal of Family Psychology on Nov 14 2019 (see record 2019-69050-001). In the article, the effect sizes listed in the "Mech. slope the effect sizes listed in the "Mech. slope ?CSI slope" and "Indirect effect of treatment" columns of Table 2 were calculated incorrectly and mistakenly reported as Cohen's d values. These errors do not change any of the conclusions of the study. However, the correct values, column heads, and associated footnote CSI slope" and "Indirect effect of treatment" columns of Table 2 were calculated incorrectly and mistakenly reported as Cohen's d values. These errors do not change any of the conclusions of the study. However, the correct values, column heads, and associated footnote are presented in the erratum.] Internet delivery of couple interventions is becoming increasingly popular; however, little is known about mechanisms of change during these interventions. One online, self-help relationship intervention-the OurRelationship program-has been shown to improve relationship satisfaction (Doss et al., 2016) during the intervention and to maintain gains through 12-months follow-up (Doss, Roddy, Nowlan, Rothman, & Christensen, 2019). This study seeks to understand mechanisms during and following this program using the same sample of 300 couples (600 individuals) randomly assigned to the program or a waitlist control group. Results from the bivariate growth curves revealed that greater increases in relationship satisfaction during the intervention were explained by improvements in negative communication, emotional intimacy, as well as target problem confidence and severity. However, changes in acceptance of targeted relationship problems, positive communication, and self-protective orientation were not related to changes in satisfaction during the intervention. Additionally, in a multivariate model, relationship target problem severity alone remained significant in the presence of other mechanisms. Improvements in positive and negative communication during the intervention and level of negative communication at the end of the intervention predicted maintenance of gains in satisfaction over 12-month follow-up. Results replicate previous findings that communication (Doss, Thum, Sevier, Atkins, & Christensen, 2005) and emotional intimacy (Doss et al., 2005; Hawrilenko, Gray, & Córdova, 2016) are key components in initial decreases in relationship distress. Furthermore, results suggest that improvements in communication may help couples more effectively navigate problems following the intervention-above and beyond its associations with prepost improvements in satisfaction. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Project description:ObjectivesTo develop We Walk, a theoretically informed, 12-week person-centred dyadic behaviour change intervention to increase physical activity (PA) in community-dwelling people with stroke (PWS) through outdoor walking.DesignThree-phase intervention development study. Phase 1: we reviewed literature on barriers and facilitators to PA after stroke and mapped them to the Behaviour Change Wheel and Theoretical Domains Framework to define intervention components. The Health Action Process Approach determined intervention structure underpinned by person-centred principles. Phase 2: stakeholder focus groups involving PWS, their companions and health professionals reviewed the draft intervention, and experts in behaviour change were consulted. Phase 3: informed by phases 1 and 2, the intervention and form of delivery were refined, with final review through patient and public involvement.SettingThree Scottish community rehabilitation stroke services.ParticipantsTwenty-three ambulatory community-dwelling PWS and their companions, thirty-seven health and exercise professionals, seven behaviour change experts.ResultsPhase 1 determined key intervention components: information about benefits of walking; developing motivation and confidence to walk; facilitating dyadic goal setting and making plans together; monitoring walking, overcoming challenges; and maintaining walking behaviour. Phase 2 review by stakeholder focus groups and behaviour change experts endorsed intervention components and structure, emphasising dyadic relational aspects as central to potential success. In phase 3, intervention content and handbooks for PWS and buddies were finalised. Healthcare professionals proposed third-sector delivery as most appropriate for intervention delivery. A detailed delivery manual was developed. Participants preferred facilitated face-to-face and telephone delivery.ConclusionsOur multilens intervention development approach ensured this novel intervention was evidence-informed, person-centred, theoretically coherent provided appropriate social support, and addressed issues of concern to PWS. This study established intervention components and structure and identified operational issues critical to future success. Future research will pilot and refine We Walk and evaluate acceptability, feasibility, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.Trial registration numberISRCTN34488928.

Project description:Brief interventions such as Screening, a single session of Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) have shown mixed effectiveness in primary care. However, there are indications that multi-session brief interventions may demonstrate more consistently positive outcomes, and perhaps a more intensive approach would be of benefit in addressing substance use in primary care. This study compared the effectiveness of SBIRT with a single BI session (BI/RT) to a multi-session brief-treatment intervention (BI/RT+) in primary care. We also developed easy-to-use, evidence-based materials to assist clinicians in delivering these interventions.This study was conducted in three Federally Qualified Healthcare Centers (FQHCs). A total of 10,935 patients were screened, and 600 individuals were recruited. The sample was primarily Black/African American (82 %) with a mean age of 40. Patients who attended a healthcare appointment were screened for substance use via the AUDIT and DAST. Patients were eligible for the study if they scored 8 or higher on the AUDIT, were using only marijuana and scored 2 or higher on the DAST, or were using other illicit drugs and scored 1 or higher on the DAST. Participants were randomly assigned to receive one-session BI/RT, or two to six sessions of brief intervention that incorporated elements of motivational enhancement therapy and cognitive-behavioral therapy (BI/RT+). Both interventions were delivered by behavioral health consultants at the FQHCs. Participants completed follow-up assessments every 3 months for 1 year. Primary outcome variables included substance use treatment sessions attended and days of substance use. Secondary outcomes included measures of health, employment, legal, and psychiatric functioning and HIV risk behaviors. Additionally, we will conduct an economic evaluation examining cost-effectiveness and will analyze outcomes from a process evaluation examining patient and provider experiences.The ability of brief interventions to impact substance use has great potential, but research findings have been mixed. By conducting a large-scale randomized controlled trial in real-world health centers, this study will answer important questions about the effectiveness of expanded BIs for patients who screen positive for risky substance use in primary care. Trial registration NCT01751672.

Project description:Introduction: The efficacy of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) for improving markers of physical fitness and cardiometabolic health is promising. The workplace is one non-laboratory setting where the effectiveness of HIIT could be explored. The aim of this study was to undertake a mixed-methods exploratory pilot trial of a workplace HIIT intervention named Brief Exercise at Work (BE@Work). Methods: Fifty-four healthy employees (mean ± standard deviation [SD] age 46 ± 10 years) from two workplaces in Northeast England were allocated to 8 weeks of thrice-weekly workplace HIIT based on boxing, stair climbing and stepping, comprising 4-7 60 s high-intensity intervals interspersed with 75 s rest (n = 30), or a no-intervention control (n = 24). The primary outcome was the change SD of predicted maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max). Markers of physical fitness, cardiometabolic health and mental well-being were also measured at baseline and follow-up. Participant perceptions of the intervention were explored in post-intervention focus groups (n = 9). Results: Mean (±SD) session attendance was 82% (±15%). Mean peak heart rate across the intervention was 87% of age-predicted maximal heart rate with a within- and between-subject SD of 5.5% and 3.7%, respectively. The SD of changes in predicted VO2max was 6.6 mL·kg-1·min-1 across both groups, which can be used to inform sample size estimations for a future full trial. The control-adjusted mean increase (95% confidence interval) in predicted VO2max was 3.9 (-0.2 to 8.1) mL·kg-1·min-1, corresponding to a Cohen's D of 0.47. We also observed preliminary evidence of small to moderate effects in favour of the intervention group for non-dominant leg extensor muscle power, markers of health-related quality of life, well-being and perceived stress and small to moderate effects in favour of the controls in perceived pain, physical activity and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. During HIIT, focus group participants reported physiological responses they perceived as unpleasant or tiring (e.g., breathlessness, local muscular fatigue), but also that they felt alert and energised afterwards. Conclusion: The findings of this exploratory pilot trial support the implementation of a definitive randomised controlled trial to quantify the effectiveness of a workplace HIIT intervention.

Dataset Information

Incorporating a brief intervention for personalised cancer risk assessment to promote behaviour change into primary care: a multi-methods pilot study.

Background

Method

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Incorporating a brief intervention for personalised cancer risk assessment to promote behaviour change into primary care: a multi-methods pilot study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets