scholarly journals Protocol for a pilot trial to assess the feasibility of the Move More @ Work intervention to encourage employees to take the opportunity to move (be physically active) after every 30 min of sitting

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Elaine A. Hargreaves ◽  
Jillian J. Haszard ◽  
Sally Shaw ◽  
Meredith C. Peddie
Keyword(s):  
Sedentary Behaviour ◽  
Behaviour Change ◽  
Control Period ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Trial Registration ◽  
Sitting Time ◽  
Behaviour Change Techniques ◽  
Prolonged Sitting ◽  
Occupational Setting ◽  
Work Intervention

Abstract Background Prolonged sitting increases the risk of cardio-metabolic disease. Office-based employees are particularly susceptible to high rates of this sedentary behaviour during work hours. Laboratory studies indicate that regularly interrupting periods of prolonged sitting with short bouts (2 min) of physical activity can improve markers of cardio-metabolic health. This method of interrupting sitting time is yet to be tested in an occupational setting and may provide an alternative to providing sit-to-stand desks. Drawing on the Behaviour Change Wheel and evidence on the barriers and motivators to performing regular activity breaks, the Move More @ Work intervention was developed. The objectives of this pilot study are to examine the feasibility, and preliminary outcomes, of this intervention designed to encourage participants to perform 1–2 min of activity after every 30 min of continuous sitting throughout the work day. The study will inform if progress to a full effectiveness trial is warranted. Methods An interrupted time series design consisting of a 4-week baseline (control period), a 12-week intervention, and a 12-week follow-up will be utilised. At least 57 university employees who self-report spending > 5 h per day sitting at work on at least 3 days per week will be recruited to participate. The intervention consists of (1) a structured consultation with a Move More @ Work coach, containing a number of behaviour change techniques to create an individualised plan of how to incorporate the activity breaks into the working day, and (2) strategies to create a supportive workplace culture for performing the activity breaks. Feasibility will be assessed by recruitment and retention rates, and acceptability of the intervention. Pilot outcomes are the number of regular activity breaks taken during the workday, cardio-metabolic risk score and self-reported health, and work-related productivity outcomes. Discussion If the Move More @ Work intervention is shown to be feasible, acceptable, and shows evidence of effectiveness, this will provide justification for the progression to a full scale evaluation of the intervention. In the longer-term, this intervention may provide an alternative means of improving health outcomes through interrupting sedentary time than that offered by current sedentary behaviour interventions. Trial registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12620000354987. Registered on 12 March 2020

scholarly journals Breaking barriers: using the Behavior Change Wheel to develop a tailored intervention to overcome workplace inhibitors to breaking up sitting time

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samson O Ojo ◽  
Daniel P. Bailey ◽  
Marsha L. Brierley ◽  
David J. Hewson ◽  
Angel M. Chater
Keyword(s):  
Behaviour Change ◽  
Theoretical Domains Framework ◽  
Office Workers ◽  
Sitting Time ◽  
Mental Wellbeing ◽  
Behaviour Change Techniques ◽  
Tailored Intervention ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Behaviour Change Technique ◽  
Break Up

Abstract Background: The workplace is a prominent domain for excessive sitting. The consequences of increased sitting time include adverse health outcomes such as cardiovascular disease and poor mental wellbeing. There is evidence that breaking up sitting could improve health, however, any such intervention in the workplace would need to be informed by a theoretical evidence-based framework. The aim of this study was to use the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW) to develop a tailored intervention to break up and reduce workplace sitting in desk-based workers. Methods: The BCW guide was followed for this qualitative, pre-intervention development study. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 25 office workers (26-59 years, mean age 40.9 [SD=10.8] years; 68% female) who were purposively recruited from local council offices and a university in the East of England region. The interview questions were developed using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Transcripts were deductively analysed using the COM-B (Capability, Opportunity, Motivation – Behaviour) model of behaviour. The Behaviour Change Technique Taxonomy Version 1 (BCTv1) was thereafter used to identify possible strategies that could be used to facilitate change in sitting behaviour of office workers in a future intervention. Results: Qualitative analysis using COM-B identified that participants felt that they had the physical Capability to break up their sitting time, however, some lacked the psychological Capability in relation to the knowledge of both guidelines for sitting time and the consequences of excess sitting. Social and physical Opportunity was identified as important, such as a supportive organisational culture (social) and the need for environmental resources (physical). Reflective and automatic Motivation was highlighted as a core target for intervention. Seven intervention functions and three policy categories from the BCW were identified as relevant. Finally, 39 behaviour change techniques (BCTs) were identified as potential active components for an intervention to break up sitting time in the workplace. Conclusions: The TDF, COM-B model and BCW can be successfully applied through a systematic process to understand the drivers of behaviour of office workers to develop a co-created intervention that can be used to break up and decrease prolonged sitting in the workplace.

scholarly journals Breaking barriers: using the Behavior Change Wheel to develop a tailored intervention to overcome workplace inhibitors to breaking up sitting time

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samson O Ojo ◽  
Daniel P. Bailey ◽  
Marsha L. Brierley ◽  
David J. Hewson ◽  
Angel M. Chater
Keyword(s):  
Behaviour Change ◽  
Theoretical Domains Framework ◽  
Office Workers ◽  
Sitting Time ◽  
Mental Wellbeing ◽  
Behaviour Change Techniques ◽  
Tailored Intervention ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Behaviour Change Technique ◽  
Break Up

Abstract Background: The workplace is a prominent domain for excessive sitting. The consequences of increased sitting time include adverse health outcomes such as cardiovascular disease and poor mental wellbeing. There is evidence that breaking up sitting could improve health, however, any such intervention in the workplace would need to be informed by a theoretical evidence-based framework. The aim of this study was to use the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW) to develop a tailored intervention to break up and reduce workplace sitting in desk-based workers. Methods: The BCW guide was followed for this qualitative, pre-intervention development study. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 25 office workers (26-59 years, mean age 40.9 [SD=10.8] years; 68% female) who were purposively recruited from local council offices and a university in the East of England region. The interview questions were developed using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Transcripts were deductively analysed using the COM-B (Capability, Opportunity, Motivation – Behaviour) model of behaviour. The Behaviour Change Technique Taxonomy Version 1 (BCTv1) was thereafter used to identify possible strategies that could be used to facilitate change in sitting behaviour of office workers in a future intervention. Results: Qualitative analysis using COM-B identified that participants felt that they had the physical Capability to break up their sitting time, however, some lacked the psychological Capability in relation to the knowledge of both guidelines for sitting time and the consequences of excess sitting. Social and physical Opportunity was identified as important, such as a supportive organisational culture (social) and the need for environmental resources (physical). Reflective and automatic Motivation was highlighted as a core target for intervention. Seven intervention functions and three policy categories from the BCW were identified as relevant. Finally, 39 behaviour change techniques (BCTs) were identified as potential active components for an intervention to break up sitting time in the workplace. Conclusions: The TDF, COM-B model and BCW can be successfully applied through a systematic process to understand the drivers of behaviour of office workers to develop a co-created intervention that can be used to break up and decrease prolonged sitting in the workplace.

scholarly journals Temporal features of sitting, standing and stepping changes in a cluster-randomised controlled trial of a workplace sitting-reduction intervention

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Samantha K. Stephens ◽  
Elisabeth A. H. Winkler ◽  
Elizabeth G. Eakin ◽  
Bronwyn K. Clark ◽  
Neville Owen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Work Hours ◽  
Trial Registration ◽  
Sitting Time ◽  
Work Time ◽  
Prolonged Sitting ◽  
Cluster Randomised ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract Background There is now a body of evidence on the effectiveness of interventions to reduce workplace sitting time. However, there has been limited reporting of how such interventions may impact behaviour both during and outside of work. Sitting, standing and stepping changes following a workplace intervention were examined across five timeframes (work time on work days; non-work time on work days; work days; non-work days; overall (i.e. work and non-work time on all days)), and the relationships between changes during and outside of work was assessed. Methods The cluster-randomised controlled trial, ‘Stand Up Victoria’, delivered a multi-component workplace-delivered intervention that successfully reduced workplace and overall sitting time (relative to controls). Separately, over the five timeframes, changes in device (activPAL3)-assessed outcomes — sitting; prolonged sitting (≥30 min bouts); standing; and, stepping — were compared between intervention (n = 114) and controls (n = 84), along with the time-course of sitting changes during work hours, using mixed models. The potential relationships of changes during work with changes outside of work were examined using compositional data analysis. Results On workdays, intervention participants significantly (p < 0.05) improved their activity profile relative to controls, with reduced sitting (− 117 min/8-h workday, 95% CI: − 141, − 93) and prolonged sitting (− 77 min/8 h workday, 95% CI: − 101, − 52); increased standing (114 min/8 h workday, 95% CI: 92, 136) and maintenance of stepping (3 min/8 h workday, 95% CI: − 7, 11, p = 0.576). Effects were nearly identical for time at work; similar but slightly weaker for overall; and, small and non-significant outside of work on workdays and non-work days. Improvements occurred at all times, but not equally, during work hours (p < 0.001). Correlations between changes during and outside of work on workdays were very weak in both the intervention group (r = − 0.07) and controls (r = − 0.09). Conclusions Sitting time was reduced almost exclusively during work hours (via replacement with standing), with reductions evident during all working hours, to varying degrees. There was no evidence of compensation, with minimal change in activity outside of work, in response to changes in activity at work. Future interventions may benefit from exploring how best to elicit change throughout the whole day, and across work and non-work domains. Trial registration This trial was prospectively registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials register (ACTRN12611000742976) on 15 July 2011

scholarly journals A pilot study of the S-MAP (Solutions for Medications Adherence Problems) intervention for older adults prescribed polypharmacy in primary care: study protocol

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
D. E. Patton ◽  
J. J. Francis ◽  
E. Clark ◽  
F. Smith ◽  
C. A. Cadogan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pilot Study ◽  
Process Evaluation ◽  
Behaviour Change ◽  
Older Patients ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Theoretical Domains Framework ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Community Pharmacies ◽  
Behaviour Change Techniques ◽  
Limited Effectiveness

Abstract Background Adhering to multiple medications as prescribed is challenging for older patients (aged ≥ 65 years) and a difficult behaviour to improve. Previous interventions designed to address this have been largely complex in nature but have shown limited effectiveness and have rarely used theory in their design. It has been recognised that theory (‘a systematic way of understanding events or situations’) can guide intervention development and help researchers better understand how complex adherence interventions work. This pilot study aims to test a novel community pharmacy-based intervention that has been systematically developed using the Theoretical Domains Framework (12-domain version) of behaviour change. Methods As part of a non-randomised pilot study, pharmacists in 12 community pharmacies across Northern Ireland (n = 6) and London, England (n = 6), will be trained to deliver the intervention to older patients who are prescribed ≥ 4 regular medicines and are non-adherent (self-reported). Ten patients will be recruited per pharmacy (n = 120) and offered up to four tailored one-to-one sessions, in the pharmacy or via telephone depending on their adherence, over a 3–4-month period. Guided by an electronic application (app) on iPads, the intervention content will be tailored to each patient’s underlying reasons for non-adherence and mapped to the most appropriate solutions using established behaviour change techniques. This study will assess the feasibility of collecting data on the primary outcome of medication adherence (self-report and dispensing data) and secondary outcomes (health-related quality of life and unplanned hospitalisations). An embedded process evaluation will assess training fidelity for pharmacy staff, intervention fidelity, acceptability to patients and pharmacists and the intervention’s mechanism of action. Process evaluation data will include audio-recordings of training workshops, intervention sessions, feedback interviews and patient surveys. Analysis will be largely descriptive. Discussion Using pre-defined progression criteria, the findings from this pilot study will guide the decision whether to proceed to a cluster randomised controlled trial to test the effectiveness of the S-MAP intervention in comparison to usual care in community pharmacies. The study will also explore how the intervention components may work to bring about change in older patients’ adherence behaviour and guide further refinement of the intervention and study procedures. Trial registration This study is registered at ISRCTN: 10.1186/ISRCTN73831533

scholarly journals Perceived Barriers and Facilitators to Breaking Up Sitting Time among Desk-Based Office Workers: A Qualitative Investigation Using the TDF and COM-B

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (16) ◽  
pp. 2903 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samson O. Ojo ◽  
Daniel P. Bailey ◽  
David J. Hewson ◽  
Angel M. Chater
Keyword(s):  
Behaviour Change ◽  
Theoretical Domains Framework ◽  
Perceived Barriers ◽  
Barriers And Facilitators ◽  
Office Workers ◽  
Sitting Time ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Behaviour Change Techniques ◽  
Organisational Support ◽  
Sitting Behaviour

High amounts of sedentary behaviour, such as sitting, can lead to adverse health consequences. Interventions to break up prolonged sitting in the workplace have used active workstations, although few studies have used behaviour change theory. This study aimed to combine the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and the Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation to Behaviour system (COM-B) to investigate perceived barriers and facilitators to breaking up sitting in desk-based office workers. Semi-structured interviews with 25 desk-based employees investigated barriers and facilitators to breaking up sitting in the workplace. Seven core inductive themes were identified: ‘Knowledge-deficit sitting behaviour’, ‘Willingness to change’, ‘Tied to the desk’, ‘Organisational support and interpersonal influences’, ‘Competing motivations’, ‘Emotional influences’, and ‘Inadequate cognitive resources for action’. These themes were then deductively mapped to 11 of the 14 TDF domains and five of the six COM-B constructs. Participants believed that high amounts of sitting had adverse consequences but lacked knowledge regarding recommendations and were at times unmotivated to change. Physical and social opportunities were identified as key influences, including organisational support and height-adjustable desks. Future research should identify intervention functions, policy categories and behaviour change techniques to inform tailored interventions to change sitting behaviour of office workers.

scholarly journals Planning for sedentary behaviour interventions: office workers’ survey and focus group responses

2017 ◽  
Vol 137 (6) ◽  
pp. 316-321 ◽  
Author(s):  
Teneale McGuckin ◽  
Rebecca Sealey ◽  
Fiona Barnett
Keyword(s):  
Focus Groups ◽  
Sedentary Behaviour ◽  
Behaviour Change ◽  
Intervention Strategies ◽  
Work Environments ◽  
Office Workers ◽  
Sitting Time ◽  
Change Strategies ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Behavioural Strategies

Aims: As sedentary behaviour is becoming more prominent in office-based work environments, this study aimed to explore office workers’ perceptions of sedentary behaviour, explore potential behavioural strategies to reduce sedentary behaviour in the workplace and identify barriers which may hamper behaviour change. Methods: A total of 140 office workers were recruited and surveyed from the same workplace. The survey included questions regarding perceptions of the relationship between sitting time and health. Following the survey, 12 employees also participated in focus groups to identify potential sedentary behaviour intervention strategies and barriers. The responses from the survey and focus groups were thematically analysed. Results: In total, 88% of all participants surveyed agreed that there was a relationship between sitting time and their health. The most prominent theme identified was musculoskeletal complaints followed by general health and weight gain or obesity. The focus groups identified that interventions targeting reducing sitting time should include education, supportive and knowledgeable managers, and a variety of behaviour change strategies to address individual preferences and barriers. Conclusion: Multiple behavioural strategies were identified, which appear to be appropriate for sedentary behaviour change.

scholarly journals PARIS: protocol for a prospective single arm, theory-based, group-based feasibility intervention study to increase Physical Activity and reduce sedentary behaviouR after barIatric Surgery

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. e051638
Author(s):  
Jennifer James ◽  
Wendy Hardeman ◽  
Helen Eborall ◽  
Mark Goodall ◽  
John Wilding
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Bariatric Surgery ◽  
Sedentary Behaviour ◽  
Behaviour Change ◽  
Feasibility Study ◽  
Theoretical Domains Framework ◽  
Comparative Approach ◽  
Service Research ◽  
Behaviour Change Techniques ◽  
Behaviour Change Intervention

IntroductionIncreased physical activity and reduced sedentary behaviour can encourage favourable outcomes after bariatric surgery. However, there is a lack of evidence as to how to support patients with behaviour change. The aim of this study is to assess the feasibility of a physiotherapist led, online group-based behaviour change intervention to increase physical activity and reduce sedentary behaviour following bariatric surgery.Methods and analysisSingle arm feasibility study of a theory and evidence-based group behaviour change intervention based on the Behaviour Change Wheel and Theoretical Domains Framework using behaviour change techniques from the Behaviour Change Technique Taxonomy v1. The intervention has eight objectives and specifies behaviour change techniques that will be used to address each of these. Groups of up to eight participants who have had surgery within the previous 5 years will meet weekly over 6 weeks for up to 1½ hours. Groups will be held online led by a physiotherapist and supported by an intervention handbook. Feasibility study outcomes include: rate of recruitment, retention, intervention fidelity, participant engagement and acceptability. Secondary outcomes include: physical activity, sedentary behaviour, body composition, self-reported health status and will be analysed descriptively. Change in these outcomes will be used to calculate the sample size for a future evaluation study. Qualitative interviews will explore participants’ views of the intervention including its acceptability. Data will be analysed according to the constant comparative approach of grounded theory.Ethics and disseminationThis study has National Health Service Research Ethics Committee approval; Haydock 20/NW/0472. All participants will provide informed consent and can withdraw at any point. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, conference and clinical service presentations.Trial registration numberISRCTN31524689.

scholarly journals The association between sedentary behaviour and indicators of stress: A systematic review

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Megan Teychenne ◽  
Lena D Stephens ◽  
Sarah A Costigan ◽  
Dana Lee Olstad ◽  
Brendon Stubbs ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Sedentary Behaviour ◽  
Strong Evidence ◽  
Computer Use ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Mental Health Outcomes ◽  
Sitting Time ◽  
Tv Viewing ◽  
Best Evidence Synthesis

Abstract Background: Emerging evidence shows sedentary behaviour may be associated with mental health outcomes. Yet, the strength of the evidence linking sedentary behaviour and stress is still unclear. This study aimed to synthesise evidence regarding associations between time spent in sedentary behaviour and stress in adults. Methods: A systematic search was conducted (January 1990 – September 2019). Following PRISMA guidelines, an evaluation of methodological quality, and best-evidence synthesis of associations between time in sedentary behaviour (including sitting time, TV viewing, computer use) and stress were presented. Twenty-six studies reporting on data from n=72,795 people (age 18-98y, 62.7% women) were included. Results: Across the studies (n=2 strong-, n=10 moderate- and n=14 weak-quality), there was insufficient evidence that overall time spent in sedentary behaviour and sitting time were associated with stress, particularly when using self-report measures of sedentary behaviour or stress. There was strong evidence of no association between TV viewing, or computer use and stress. Amongst studies using objective measures of sedentary behaviour and/or stress there was also strong evidence of no association. Conclusion: Although previous research suggested sedentary behaviour may be linked to mental health outcomes such as depression and anxiety, the evidence for an association between various types of sedentary behaviour and stress is limited in quality, and associations are either inconsistent or null. High-quality longitudinal/interventional research is required to confirm findings and determine the direction of associations between different contexts (i.e. purpose) and domains (i.e. leisure, occupational, transport) of sedentary behaviour and stress. Keywords: sedentary behaviour; sitting time; television viewing; stress; mental health; adults

scholarly journals Efficacy, characteristics, behavioural models and behaviour change strategies, of non-workplace interventions specifically targeting sedentary behaviour; a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised control trials in healthy ambulatory adults

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (9) ◽  
pp. e0256828
Author(s):  
Fiona Curran ◽  
Catherine Blake ◽  
Caitriona Cunningham ◽  
Carla Perrotta ◽  
Hidde van der Ploeg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sedentary Behaviour ◽  
Behaviour Change ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Sitting Time ◽  
Change Strategies ◽  
Standing Time ◽  
Effective Interventions ◽  
Randomised Control Trials ◽  
Sedentary Breaks

Background Sedentary behaviour (SB) research has grown exponentially but efficacy for interventions to reduce sedentary behaviour is often contaminated by interventions primarily or co-targeting other behaviours and outcomes. The primary aim of this research therefore, was to systematically review the efficacy of interventions specifically targeting sedentary behaviour reduction, as a sole primary outcome, from randomised control trials in healthy ambulatory adults. This research also sought to identify the successful interventions characteristics, behaviour change techniques (BCT’s) and underlying theories, and their relation to intervention effectiveness. Methods We followed PRISMA reporting guidelines for this systematic review. Six electronic databases were searched and a grey literature review conducted. Only randomised or cluster randomised controlled trials, from 2000 to 2020, in adult populations with a sole primary outcome of change in sedentary behaviour were included. Data codebooks were developed, data were extracted, and a narrative synthesis and meta-analysis was conducted using mixed methods random effects models. Results Of 5589 studies identified, 7 studies met the inclusion criteria. Six studies reported activPAL3 measures of mean daily sitting time, and four reported mean daily standing time, stepping time and number of sedentary breaks. Pooled analysis of weighted mean differences revealed a reduction in mean daily sitting time of -32.4mins CI (-50.3, -14.4), an increase in mean daily standing time of 31.75mins CI (13.7, 49.8), and mean daily stepping time of 9.5mins CI (2.8, 16.3), and an increase in rate of sedentary breaks per day of 3.6 (CI 1.6, 5.6). BCTs used exclusively in two of the three most effective interventions are ‘feedback on behaviour’ and ‘goal setting behaviour’ whilst all three most effective interventions included ‘instruction on how to perform the behaviour’ and ‘adding objects to the environment’, BCTs which were also used in less effective interventions. Conclusions Although limited by small sample sizes and short follow up periods, this review suggests that interventions specifically designed to change sedentary behaviour, reduce overall daily sitting time by half an hour, with an equivalent increase in standing time, in the short to medium term. Effective characteristics and behaviour change strategies are identified for future development of high quality interventions targeting change in sedentary behaviour. Prospero registration PROSPERO 2020 CRD42020172457 Available from: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020172457.

scholarly journals Which behaviour change techniques are effective to promote physical activity and reduce sedentary behaviour in adults: a factorial randomized trial of an e- and m-health intervention

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helene Schroé ◽  
Delfien Van Dyck ◽  
Annick De Paepe ◽  
Louise Poppe ◽  
Wen Wei Loh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Sedentary Behaviour ◽  
Behaviour Change ◽  
Action Planning ◽  
Health Intervention ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Behaviour Change Techniques ◽  
Self Monitoring ◽  
Coping Planning ◽  
The Impact

Abstract BackgroundE- and m-health interventions are promising to change health behaviour. Many of these interventions use a large variety of behaviour change techniques (BCTs), but it’s not known which BCTs or which combination of BCTs contribute to their efficacy. Therefore, this study investigated the efficacy of three BCTs (i.e. action planning, coping planning and self-monitoring) and their combinations on physical activity (PA) and sedentary behaviour (SB).MethodsIn a 2(action planning: present vs absent) x2(coping planning: present vs absent) x2(self-monitoring: present vs absent) factorial trial, 473 adults from the general population used the self-regulation based e- and m-health intervention ‘MyPlan2.0’ for five weeks. All combinations of BCTs were considered, resulting in eight groups. Participants selected their preferred target behaviour, either PA (n = 335,age = 35.8,28.1% men) or SB (n = 138,age = 37.8,37.7% men), and were then randomly allocated to the experimental groups. Levels of PA (MVPA in minutes/week) or SB (total sedentary time in hours/day) were assessed at baseline and post-intervention using self-reported questionnaires. Linear mixed-effect models were fitted to assess the impact of the different combinations of the BCTs on PA and SB.ResultsFirst, overall efficacy of each BCT was examined. The delivery of self-monitoring increased PA (t = 2.735,p = 0.007) and reduced SB (t=-2.573,p = 0.012) compared with no delivery of self-monitoring. Also, the delivery of coping planning increased PA (t = 2.302,p = 0.022) compared with no delivery of coping planning. Second, we investigated to what extent adding BCTs increased efficacy. Using the combination of the three BCTs was most effective to increase PA (x2 = 8,849,p = 0.003) whereas the combination of action planning and self-monitoring was most effective to decrease SB (x2 = 3.918,p = 0.048). To increase PA, action planning was always more effective in combination with coping planning (x2 = 5.590,p = 0.014;x2 = 17.722,p < 0.001;x2 = 4.552,p = 0.033) compared with using action planning without coping planning. Of note, the use of action planning alone reduced PA compared with using coping planning alone (x2 = 4.389,p = 0.031) and self-monitoring alone (x2 = 8.858,p = 003), respectively.ConclusionsThis study provides indications that different (combinations of) BCTs may be effective to promote PA and reduce SB. More experimental research to investigate the effectiveness of BCTs is needed, which can contribute to improved design and more effective e- and m-health interventions in the future.Trial registrationThis study was preregistered as a clinical trial (ID number: NCT03274271). Release date: 20 October 2017, http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03274271

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document