Are physical activity referral scheme components associated with increased physical activity, scheme uptake, and adherence rate? A meta-analysis and meta-regression

被引:1
作者
Mino, Eriselda [1 ]
Pfeifer, Klaus [1 ]
Hanson, Coral L. [2 ]
Schuler, Michael [3 ,4 ]
Brandmeier, Anna [1 ]
Klamroth, Sarah [1 ]
Naber, Inga [1 ]
Weissenfels, Anja [1 ]
McHale, Sheona [2 ]
Abu-Omar, Karim [1 ]
Gelius, Peter [5 ]
Whiting, Stephen [6 ]
Wickramasinghe, Kremlin [6 ]
Galea, Gauden [6 ]
Geidl, Wolfgang [1 ]
机构
[1] Friedrich Alexander Univ Erlangen Nurnberg FAU, Dept Sport Sci & Sport, Gebbertstr 123b, D-91058 Erlangen, Germany
[2] Edinburgh Napier Univ, Sch Hlth & Social Care, Sighthill Campus, Edinburgh EH11 4DN, Scotland
[3] Univ Wurzburg, Inst Clin Epidemiol & Biometry, Josef Schneider Str 2-D7, D-97080 Wurzburg, Germany
[4] Univ Appl Sci, Dept Appl Hlth Sci, Bochum, Germany
[5] Univ Lausanne, Inst Sport Sci, Lausanne, Switzerland
[6] WHO Reg Off Europe, Special Initiat Noncommunicable Dis & Innovat SNI, Copenhagen, Denmark
关键词
Physical activity; Physical activity referral scheme; Exercise referral scheme; Physical activity prescription; Exercise prescription; Referral and consultation; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED-TRIAL; HEART-DISEASE RISK; GREEN PRESCRIPTION; ACTIVITY PROMOTION; EXERCISE PROGRAM; GENERAL-PRACTICE; PRIMARY-CARE; HEALTH; ADVICE; ADULTS;
D O I
10.1186/s12966-024-01623-5
中图分类号
R15 [营养卫生、食品卫生]; TS201 [基础科学];
学科分类号
100403 ;
摘要
BackgroundPhysical activity referral schemes (PARS) are composed of various components, such as a written prescription or a person-centered approach. The role of these components in their effectiveness is yet to be understood. Therefore, we aimed to explore the relationships between PARS components and physical activity, scheme uptake, and adherence rate; and to estimate the effect of PARS.MethodsWe searched Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, ScienceDirect, SpringerLink, HTA, Wiley Online Library, SAGE Journals, Taylor & Francis, Google Scholar, OpenGrey, and CORE. Eligible studies were published between 1990 and November 2023 in English or German, investigated PARS with participants aged >= 16 years, and reported physical activity, scheme uptake, or scheme adherence. Separate random-effects meta-analysis by comparison group were conducted for physical activity. Scheme uptake and adherence rates were pooled using proportional meta-analysis. The components were analyzed via univariate meta-regression. We rated the risk of bias using RoB2 and ROBINS-I, and the certainty of evidence using GRADE.ResultsFifty-two studies were included. PARS were more effective in increasing physical activity than usual care (k = 11, n = 5046, Hedges' g = 0.18, 95%CI 0.12 to 0.25; high certainty of evidence). When PARS were compared with physical activity advice or enhanced scheme versions, the pooled Hedges' g values for physical activity were -0.06 (k = 5, n = 1082, 95%CI -0.21 to 0.10; low certainty of evidence), and 0.07 (k = 9, n = 2647, 95%CI -0.03 to 0.18; low certainty of evidence) respectively. Scheme uptake was 87% (95%CI 77% to 94%, k = 14, n = 5000) across experimental studies and 68% (95%CI 51% to 83%, k = 14, n = 25,048) across non-experimental studies. Pooled scheme adherence was 68% (95%CI 55% to 80%, k = 16, n = 3939) and 53% (95%CI 42% to 63%, k = 18, n = 14,605). The meta-regression did not detect any significant relationships between components and physical activity or scheme uptake. A person-centered approach, screening, and brief advice were positively associated with scheme adherence, while physical activity sessions were negatively associated.ConclusionPARS are more effective in increasing physical activity than usual care only. We did not identify any components as significant predictors of physical activity and scheme uptake. Four components predicted scheme adherence, indicating that the component-effectiveness relationship warrants further research.
引用
收藏
页数:21
相关论文
共 99 条
[1]   A randomized intervention of physical activity promotion and patient self-monitoring in primary health care [J].
Aittasalo, M ;
Millunpalo, S ;
Kukkonen-Harjula, K ;
Pasanen, M .
PREVENTIVE MEDICINE, 2006, 42 (01) :40-46
[2]   Physical Activity on Prescription in Routine Health Care: 1-Year Follow-Up of Patients with and without Counsellor Support [J].
Andersen, Pia ;
Holmberg, Sara ;
Arestedt, Kristofer ;
Lendahls, Lena ;
Nilsen, Per .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH, 2020, 17 (16) :1-15
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2018, Global Action Plan on Physical Activity 2018-2030: More Active People for a Healthier World
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2014, Physical Activity: Exercise Referral Schemes
[5]   How to perform a meta-analysis with R: a practical tutorial [J].
Balduzzi, Sara ;
Ruecker, Gerta ;
Schwarzer, Guido .
EVIDENCE-BASED MENTAL HEALTH, 2019, 22 (04) :153-160
[6]   Conducting proportional meta-analysis in different types of systematic reviews: a guide for synthesisers of evidence [J].
Barker, Timothy Hugh ;
Migliavaca, Celina Borges ;
Stein, Cinara ;
Colpani, Veronica ;
Falavigna, Maicon ;
Aromataris, Edoardo ;
Munn, Zachary .
BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2021, 21 (01)
[7]   Comparing physical activity prescription with verbal advice for general practice patients with cardiovascular risk factors: results from the PEPPER randomised controlled trial [J].
Bellanger, William ;
Peurois, Matthieu ;
Connan, Laurent ;
Navasiolava, Nastassia ;
Missud, David ;
Py, Thibaut ;
Begue, Cyril .
BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, 2023, 23 (01)
[8]  
Borenstein M., 2009, Introduction to meta-analysis, DOI DOI 10.1002/9780470743386
[9]  
Bredahl T., 2011, Sport Sci Rev, V20, P85, DOI [10.2478/v10237-011-0056-1, DOI 10.2478/V10237-011-0056-1]
[10]   Pragmatic evaluation of a coproduced physical activity referral scheme: a UK quasi-experimental study [J].
Buckley, Benjamin J. R. ;
Thijssen, Dick H. J. ;
Murphy, Rebecca C. ;
Graves, Lee E. F. ;
Cochrane, Madeleine ;
Gillison, Fiona ;
Crone, Diane ;
Wilson, Philip M. ;
Whyte, Greg ;
Watson, Paula M. .
BMJ OPEN, 2020, 10 (10)