Dataset Information

Feasibility of two screen media reduction interventions: Results from the SCREENS pilot trial

ABSTRACT:

Background

Advancements in screen media devices has transformed the way families engage with screen media. Although these modern devices offer many opportunities, e.g. communication and research online, an in-depth understanding of how these devices affect our health, is lacking. Before a definite randomized controlled trial, the SCREENS pilot study was conducted to assess compliance to and feasibility of two interventions, a measurement protocol, and a survey-based recruitment strategy. Also, the potential of the interventions to impact leisure time spent non-sedentary in children six-to-ten years of age was explored.

Methods

Families (N = 12) were recruited through a population-based survey sent out in October of 2018 to adults (N = 1,675) in the Municipality of Middelfart, Denmark. Families were randomized to one of two two-week interventions; an Evening Restriction intervention (no screen media use after six pm) and a General Restrict intervention (limit entertainment-based screen media to three hours/week/person). Intervention compliance was assessed objectively by measuring household TV usage, smartphone and tablet activity via an application, and via screen media diaries. During baseline and follow-up, as part of larger protocol, family members wore two triaxial accelerometers for seven consecutive days. The potential of the interventions to impact non-sedentary time was explored based on means and standard errors (SEs).

Results

Despite almost 85% and 75% reductions in leisure screen media use 0% and 50% of families were compliant in the Evening Restrict group and General Restrict group, respectively, based on strict a priori criteria. Participant feedback indicated that the General Restrict intervention generally was feasibly. Compliance to the accelerometry wear protocol was high (median non-wear was <1 hour/week). Moreover, the recruitment strategy was implemented and was feasible. The General restrict intervention might increase children’s non-sedentary time (mean (SE): 36.6 (23) min/day, N = 6).

Conclusions

The General Restriction intervention, the accelerometer wear protocol and recruitment strategy, appeared feasible.

Trial registration

NCT03788525 at https://clinicaltrials.gov [Retrospectively registered; 27th of December, 2018].

SUBMITTER: Rasmussen M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8592478 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has challenged the mental health of health care workers, increasing the rates of stress, moral distress (MD), and moral injury (MI). Virtual reality (VR) is a useful tool for studying MD and MI because it can effectively elicit psychophysiological responses, is customizable, and permits the controlled study of participants in real time.ObjectiveThis study aims to investigate the feasibility of using an intervention comprising a VR scenario and an educational video to examine MD among health care workers during the COVID-19 pandemic and to use our mobile app for longitudinal monitoring of stress, MD, and MI after the intervention.MethodsWe recruited 15 participants for a compound intervention consisting of a VR scenario followed by an educational video and a repetition of the VR scenario. The scenario portrayed a morally challenging situation related to a shortage of life-saving equipment. Physiological signals and scores of the Moral Injury Outcome Scale (MIOS) and Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) were collected. Participants underwent a debriefing session to provide their impressions of the intervention, and content analysis was performed on the sessions. Participants were also instructed to use a mobile app for 8 weeks after the intervention to monitor stress, MD, and mental health symptoms. We conducted Wilcoxon signed rank tests on the PSS and MIOS scores to investigate whether the VR scenario could induce stress and MD. We also evaluated user experience and the sense of presence after the intervention through semi-open-ended feedback and the Igroup Presence Questionnaire, respectively. Qualitative feedback was summarized and categorized to offer an experiential perspective.ResultsAll participants completed the intervention. Mean pre- and postintervention scores were respectively 10.4 (SD 9.9) and 13.5 (SD 9.1) for the MIOS and 17.3 (SD 7.5) and 19.1 (SD 8.1) for the PSS. Statistical analyses revealed no significant pre- to postintervention difference in the MIOS and PSS scores (P=.11 and P=.22, respectively), suggesting that the experiment did not acutely induce significant levels of stress or MD. However, content analysis revealed feelings of guilt, shame, and betrayal, which relate to the experience of MD. On the basis of the Igroup Presence Questionnaire results, the VR scenario achieved an above-average degree of overall presence, spatial presence, and involvement, and slightly below-average realism. Of the 15 participants, 8 (53%) did not answer symptom surveys on the mobile app.ConclusionsOur study demonstrated VR to be a feasible method to simulate morally challenging situations and elicit genuine responses associated with MD with high acceptability and tolerability. Future research could better define the efficacy of VR in examining stress, MD, and MI both acutely and in the longer term. An improved participant strategy for mobile data capture is needed for future studies.Trial registrationClinicalTrails.gov NCT05001542; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05001542.International registered report identifier (irrid)RR2-10.2196/32240.

Project description:Pregnant individuals rarely achieve moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity recommendations.Purpose The sedentary behavior reduction in pregnancy intervention (SPRING) pilot and feasibility randomized trial aimed to demonstrate feasibility, acceptability, and initial efficacy of a lower intensity intervention targeting reduced sedentary behavior and increased standing and steps.Methods First trimester pregnant individuals at risk for high sedentary behavior and adverse pregnancy outcomes (APO) were randomized 2:1 to a multi-component sedentary behavior reduction intervention or no-contact control. Intervention components included biweekly remote health coaching, wearable activity monitor, height-adjustable workstation, and a private Facebook group. Evidence-based behavioral targets included sedentary time < 9 h/day, increasing standing by 2-3 h/day, and ≥ 7500 steps/day. Participants completed all-remote assessments (baseline, second trimester, third trimester) of sedentary behavior and activity (thigh-worn activPAL) along with exploratory pregnancy health outcomes abstracted from medical records. Intervention effects vs. control were evaluated using generalized mixed models and an intention-to-treat approach. Intervention participants also provided feedback on perceived benefits and acceptability.Results Participants (34 intervention; 17 control) had mean age 32 years, were 83% White, with mean pre-pregnancy BMI 28 kg/m2. Retention was high (90% and 83% at second and third trimester follow-up visits). Intervention participants decreased sedentary time (-0.84 h/day, p = 0.019) and increased standing (+0.77 h/day, p = 0.003), but did not increase steps/day (+710, p = 0.257) compared to controls. Intervention participants reported many perceived benefits and identified the wearable, height-adjustable workstation, and behavioral lessons as most useful.Conclusion For pregnant individuals at risk for high sedentary behavior and APOs, a sedentary behavior reduction intervention is feasible, acceptable, and may offer a viable alternative to more intense physical activity recommendations during pregnancy. Further testing in a fully powered clinical trial is warranted.Trial registration NCT05093842 on clinicaltrials.gov.

Project description:BackgroundYoung adults involved in the justice system have high rates of substance use disorders and low rates of treatment engagement. Most justice-involved young adults are supervised in the community-not incarcerated in jail or prison-where they have ongoing access to substances and experience significant barriers to care. When they do engage in treatment, they tend to have worse outcomes than justice-involved adolescents and older adults. Despite the need to develop targeted treatments, there are unique challenges in recruiting this population into clinical research. Digital health technology offers many novel avenues for recruiting justice-involved young adults into clinical research studies and disseminating substance use disorder treatments to justice-involved young adults. Because the vast majority of young adults regularly use one or more social media platforms, social media may offer a cost-effective and efficient way to achieve these goals.ObjectiveThis study aimed to describe the process and feasibility of using social media platforms (Facebook and Reddit) to recruit justice-involved young adults into clinical research. Justice-involved young adults recruited from these platforms completed a survey assessing the acceptability of digital health interventions to address substance use in this population.MethodsJustice-involved young adults (aged 18-24 years) were recruited through paid advertisements placed on Facebook and Reddit. Participants responded to a web-based survey focused on their substance use, treatment use history, and acceptability of various digital health interventions focused on substance use.ResultsA national sample of justice-involved young adults were successfully enrolled and completed the survey (N=131). Participants were racially diverse (8/131, 6.1% American Indian individuals; 27/131, 20.6% Asian individuals; 23/131, 17.6% Black individuals; 26/131, 19.8% Latinx individuals; 8/131, 6.1% Pacific Islander individuals; 49/131, 37.4% White individuals; and 2/131, 1.5% individuals who identified as "other" race and ethnicity). Advertisements were cost-effective (US $0.66 per click on Facebook and US $0.47 per click on Reddit). More than half (72/131, 54.9%) of the participants were on probation or parole in the past year and reported hazardous alcohol (54/131, 51.9%) or drug (66/131, 57.4%) use. Most of the participants (103/131, 78.6%) were not currently participating in substance use treatment. Nearly two-third (82/131, 62.6%) of the participants were willing to participate in one or more hypothetical digital health interventions.ConclusionsSocial media is a feasible and cost-effective method for reaching justice-involved young adults to participate in substance use research trials. With limited budgets, researchers can reach a broad audience, many of whom could benefit from treatment but are not currently engaged in care. Proposed digital health interventions focusing on reducing substance use, such as private Facebook groups, SMS text message-based appointment reminders, and coaching, had high acceptability. Future work will build on these findings to develop substance use treatment interventions for this population.

Project description:Background:Distress tolerance is the ability to pursue one's goals in the presence of (chronic) stressors, hardship, adversities and negative internal states, and psychological distress. By contrast, distress intolerance is a transdiagnostic indicator of mental illness and a mediator in coping with problems in life, work demands, or stress in general. There is a lack of data regarding intervention strategies. The objective of the present study is to test the differential effects of two treatment approaches: "regeneration fostering" versus "resistance training." Methods:Inpatients of a psychosomatic hospital were randomly allocated to either a resistance training group therapy (n?=?65)-that is, active coping with demands and endurance-or a regeneration fostering group therapy (n?=?62)-that is, recovery, mindful indulgence, and creative activities. They were compared with a group of patients who received treatment as usual (n?=?43), without special treatments for distress intolerance, and the outcome was measured with the "Distress Intolerance Scale." One-way and repeated measure analyses of variance and paired t tests were used for the analysis. Results:The "regeneration" group showed a significant improvement in distress intolerance, whereas there was no significant change for the treatment-as-usual group and in the "resistance" group. Post hoc tests were conducted with paired sample t tests for pre-post comparisons for each group. No differences were found for the treatment-as-usual group (mean difference: 0.03, SD (mean difference): 0.89; t(42)?=?0.266, p?=?0.792, d?=?0.04) and for the resistance group (mean difference:-0.07, SD (mean difference): 0.73; t(63)?=?-0.736, p?=?0.464, d?=?0.08). The regeneration group showed a significant decline in distress intolerance (mean difference: 0.29, SD (mean difference): 0.72; t(61)?=?3.156, p?=?0.002, d?=?0.38). Conclusions:In the treatment of distress intolerance, it seems promising to focus on positive psychology interventions and resources. Limitations of the study are that it was conducted with psychosomatic inpatients only and that no follow-up data are available.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough previous clinical studies suggest possible benefits of acupuncture for knee osteoarthritis (KOA), the value of acupuncture at sensitized points is uncertain. We aimed to preliminarily assess the feasibility of performing a definitive randomized controlled trial to explore the effectiveness of acupuncture for KOA with highly sensitized acupoints.MethodsIn this randomized, single-blind, parallel, pilot trial, 36 participants with KOA were randomly assigned to receive acupuncture at highly sensitized acupoints (high-sensitization group) or at low/non-sensitized points (low/non-sensitization group) by a computer-generated random sequence. Both groups received three treatment sessions per week for four consecutive weeks (12 sessions in total). Assessments were performed at screening and at 4, 8, 12, and 16?weeks after randomization. Primary feasibility outcomes were patient recruitment, retention rate, and adherence to group treatment. Secondary outcomes included the change of Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) total score from baseline to 16?weeks, the change of Short Form (SF)-12 health survey score, and safety outcomes.ResultsPatient recruitment of 36 patients took 2 months, achieving the recruitment target. Retention rates were similar between the treatment groups, 14 (77.8%) patients in the high-sensitization group completed the 16-week follow-up and compared to 14 (77.8%) patients in low/non-sensitization group, but the result was lower than expected. All patients received at least ten treatment sessions in total. The WOMAC total score and the pain, stiffness, and physical function score in the high-sensitization group were lower or very close to those in the control group at each assessment point. Similar results were observed on quality of life. No adverse events occurred.ConclusionThis trial has presented preliminary data on the feasibility of conducting a large trial to test the effectiveness of acupuncture at sensitized points in KOA patients.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03008668. Registered on 26 December 2016-retrospectively registered.

Project description:BackgroundSeveral mobile apps that monitor symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) exist, but a recent systematic review indicated that high-quality apps are lacking. When patients self-monitor their own disease with patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and self-initiate care at the right moment, it may be possible to reduce the frequency of their clinic visits, which would reduce health care burden and costs. We developed an app, that is, the MijnReuma Reade app, for this purpose and performed 2 pilot tests with weekly self-monitoring.ObjectiveThe primary objective of this study was to design, develop, and evaluate the usability, satisfaction, and usage of the MijnReuma Reade app-an app that allows patients with RA to monitor their own disease. The secondary objective was to review the patients' perspectives on app usage and its intended purpose.MethodsThis app was designed in collaboration with patients with RA, rheumatologists, and information technology experts. Two 1-month pilot studies were performed, after which satisfaction (0-10 scale), usability (system usability scale, 0-100), and usage (proportion of completed questionnaires) of this app were assessed. After the second pilot study, semistructured interviews were performed to determine patients' perspectives and the promoters and barriers of app usage.ResultsIn the first and second pilot study, 42 and 27 patients were included, respectively. Overall, the patients were satisfied (medians, 8 and 7) and found the app usable (mean system usability scores, 76 and 71) in pilot studies 1 and 2, respectively. App usage declined over time in both the pilot studies; 61% (17/28) and 37% (10/27) of the patients who disclosed their usage statistics completed the final weekly questionnaire in pilot study 1 and pilot study 2, respectively. Approximately 81% (25/31) of the patients indicated they would like to skip hospital visits if the self-monitored disease activity is low. In the semistructured interviews, technical problems, internal resistance (respondent fatigue, the app reminded them of their disease), and a lack of symptoms were identified as barriers for usage. Patients reported that "experiencing more grip on their disease" and "improved communication with their physician" were promoters for usage. Patients reported that pain positively mediated usage, that is, more pain promoted and less pain discouraged app usage.ConclusionsThis study illustrates the feasibility of the MijnReuma Reade app that enables self-monitoring of the disease activity in patients with RA with the overarching aim to allocate clinical consultations according to need. Satisfaction with the app and usability of the app were found to be high; however, app usage declined over time. Patients acknowledged the potential of the app to self-monitor their own disease and would like to be able to skip clinic visits if the monitored disease activity is low. To evaluate this strategy, a randomized controlled trial is underway.

Project description:BackgroundA high-salt diet is a risk factor for hypertension and cardiovascular disease; therefore, reducing dietary salt intake is a key part of prevention strategies. There are few effective salt reduction interventions suitable for delivery in the primary care setting, where the majority of the management and diagnosis of hypertension occurs.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to assess the feasibility of a complex behavioral intervention to lower salt intake in people with elevated blood pressure and test the trial procedures for a randomized controlled trial to investigate the intervention's effectiveness.MethodsThis feasibility study was an unblinded, randomized controlled trial of a mobile health intervention for salt reduction versus an advice leaflet (control). The intervention was developed using the Behavior Change Wheel and comprised individualized, brief advice from a health care professional with the use of the SaltSwap app. Participants with an elevated blood pressure recorded in the clinic were recruited through primary care practices in the United Kingdom. Primary outcomes assessed the feasibility of progression to a larger trial, including follow-up attendance, fidelity of intervention delivery, and app use. Secondary outcomes were objectively assessed using changes in salt intake (measured via 24-hour urine collection), salt content of purchased foods, and blood pressure. Qualitative outcomes were assessed using the think-aloud method, and the process outcomes were evaluated.ResultsA total of 47 participants were randomized. All progression criteria were met: follow-up attendance (45/47, 96%), intervention fidelity (25/31, 81%), and app use (27/31, 87%). There was no evidence that the intervention significantly reduced the salt content of purchased foods, salt intake, or blood pressure; however, this feasibility study was not powered to detect changes in secondary outcomes. Process and qualitative outcomes demonstrated that the trial design was feasible and the intervention was acceptable to both individuals and practitioners and positively influenced salt intake behaviors.ConclusionsThe intervention was acceptable and feasible to deliver within primary care; the trial procedures were practicable, and there was sufficient signal of potential efficacy to change salt intake. With some improvements to the intervention app, a larger trial to assess intervention effectiveness for reducing salt intake and blood pressure is warranted.Trial registrationInternational Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN): 20910962; https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN20910962.