Abstract Background: Lifestyle interventions for severe mental illness (SMI) are known to have small to modest efect on physical health outcomes. Little attention has been given to patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Aim: To systematically review the use of PROs and their measures, and quantify the efects of lifestyle interventions in patients with SMI on these PROs. Methods: Five electronic databases were searched (PubMed/Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science) from inception until 12 November 2020 (PROSPERO: CRD42020212135). Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efcacy of lifestyle interventions focusing on healthy diet, physical activity, or both for patients with SMI were included. Outcomes of interest were PROs. Results: A total of 11.267 unique records were identifed from the database search, 66 full-text articles were assessed, and 36 RCTs were included, of which 21 were suitable for meta-analyses. In total, 5.907 participants were included across studies. Lifestyle interventions had no signifcant efect on quality of life (g=0.13; 95% CI=−0.02 to 0.27), with high heterogeneity (I2 =68.7%). We found a small efect on depression severity (g=0.30, 95% CI=0.00 to 0.58, I2 =65.2%) and a moderate efect on anxiety severity (g=0.56, 95% CI=0.16 to 0.95, I2 =0%). Discussion: This meta-analysis quantifes the efects of lifestyle interventions on PROs. Lifestyle interventions have no signifcant efect on quality of life, yet they could improve mental health outcomes such as depression and anxiety symptoms. Further use of patient-reported outcome measures in lifestyle research is recommended to fully capture the impact of lifestyle interventions.
DOCUMENT
Abstract Background: Multidimensional frailty, including physical, psychological, and social components, is associated to disability, lower quality of life, increased healthcare utilization, and mortality. In order to prevent or delay frailty, more knowledge of its determinants is necessary; one of these determinants is lifestyle. The aim of this study is to determine the association between lifestyle factors smoking, alcohol use, nutrition, physical activity, and multidimensional frailty. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted in two samples comprising in total 45,336 Dutch communitydwelling individuals aged 65 years or older. These samples completed a questionnaire including questions about smoking, alcohol use, physical activity, sociodemographic factors (both samples), and nutrition (one sample). Multidimensional frailty was assessed with the Tilburg Frailty Indicator (TFI). Results: Higher alcohol consumption, physical activity, healthy nutrition, and less smoking were associated with less total, physical, psychological and social frailty after controlling for effects of other lifestyle factors and sociodemographic characteristics of the participants (age, gender, marital status, education, income). Effects of physical activity on total and physical frailty were up to considerable, whereas the effects of other lifestyle factors on frailty were small. Conclusions: The four lifestyle factors were not only associated with physical frailty but also with psychological and social frailty. The different associations of frailty domains with lifestyle factors emphasize the importance of assessing frailty broadly and thus to pay attention to the multidimensional nature of this concept. The findings offer healthcare professionals starting points for interventions with the purpose to prevent or delay the onset of frailty, so communitydwelling older people have the possibility to aging in place accompanied by a good quality of life.
DOCUMENT
Abstract: Combined lifestyle interventions (CLI) are focused on guiding clients with weight-related health risks into a healthy lifestyle. CLIs are most often delivered through face-to-face sessions with limited use of eHealth technologies. To integrate eHealth into existing CLIs, it is important to identify how behavior change techniques are being used by health professionals in the online and offline treatment of overweight clients. Therefore, we conducted online semi-structured interviews with providers of online and offline lifestyle interventions. Data were analyzed using an inductive thematic approach. Thirty-eight professionals with (n = 23) and without (n = 15) eHealth experience were interviewed. Professionals indicate that goal setting and action planning, providing feedback and monitoring, facilitating social support, and shaping knowledge are of high value to improve physical activity and eating behaviors. These findings suggest that it may be beneficial to use monitoring devices combined with video consultations to provide just-in-time feedback based on the client’s actual performance. In addition, it can be useful to incorporate specific social support functions allowing CLI clients to interact with each other. Lastly, our results indicate that online modules can be used to enhance knowledge about health consequences of unhealthy behavior in clients with weight-related health risks.
DOCUMENT
Reducing health inequalities is a policy priority in many developed countries. Little is known about effective strategies to reduce inequalities in obesity and its underlying behaviors. The goal of the study was to investigate differential effectiveness of interventions aimed at obesity prevention, the promotion of physical activity or a healthy diet by SES.Evidence acquisition: Subgroup analyses in 2010 and 2011 of 26 Dutch studies funded by The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development after 1990 (n=17) or identified by expert contact (n=9). Methodologic quality and differential effects were synthesized in harvest plots, subdivided by setting, age group, intensity, and time to follow-up.Evidence synthesis: Seven lifestyle interventions were rated more effective and four less effective in groups with high SES; for 15 studies no differential effects could be demonstrated. One study in the healthcare setting showed comparable effects in both socioeconomic groups. The only mass media campaign provided modest evidence for higher effectiveness among those with high SES.Individually tailored and workplace interventions were either more effective in higher-SES groups (n=4) or no differential effects were demonstrated (n=9). School-based studies (n=7) showed mixed results. Two of six community studies provided evidence for better effectiveness in lower-SES groups; none were more effective in higher-SES groups. One high-intensity community-based study provided best evidence for higher effectiveness in low-SES groups.Conclusions: Although for the majority of interventions aimed at obesity prevention, the promotion of physical activity, or a healthy diet, no differential effectiveness could be demonstrated, interventions may widen as well as reduce socioeconomic inequalities in these outcomes. Equityspecific subgroup analyses contribute to needed knowledge about what may work to reduce socioeconomic inequalities in obesity and underlying health behaviors.
LINK
BackgroundA healthy lifestyle is indispensable for the prevention of noncommunicable diseases. However, lifestyle medicine is hampered by time constraints and competing priorities of treating physicians. A dedicated lifestyle front office (LFO) in secondary/tertiary care may provide an important contribution to optimize patient-centred lifestyle care and connect to lifestyle initiatives from the community. The LOFIT study aims to gain insight into the (cost-)effectiveness of the LFO.MethodsTwo parallel pragmatic randomized controlled trials will be conducted for (cardio)vascular disorders (i.e. (at risk of) (cardio)vascular disease, diabetes) and musculoskeletal disorders (i.e. osteoarthritis, hip or knee prosthesis). Patients from three outpatient clinics in the Netherlands will be invited to participate in the study. Inclusion criteria are body mass index (BMI) ≥25 (kg/m2) and/or smoking. Participants will be randomly allocated to either the intervention group or a usual care control group. In total, we aim to include 552 patients, 276 in each trial divided over both treatment arms. Patients allocated to the intervention group will participate in a face-to-face motivational interviewing (MI) coaching session with a so-called lifestyle broker. The patient will be supported and guided towards suitable community-based lifestyle initiatives. A network communication platform will be used to communicate between the lifestyle broker, patient, referred community-based lifestyle initiative and/or other relevant stakeholders (e.g. general practitioner). The primary outcome measure is the adapted Fuster-BEWAT, a composite health risk and lifestyle score consisting of resting systolic and diastolic blood pressure, objectively measured physical activity and sitting time, BMI, fruit and vegetable consumption and smoking behaviour. Secondary outcomes include cardiometabolic markers, anthropometrics, health behaviours, psychological factors, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), cost-effectiveness measures and a mixed-method process evaluation. Data collection will be conducted at baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months follow-up.DiscussionThis study will gain insight into the (cost-)effectiveness of a novel care model in which patients under treatment in secondary or tertiary care are referred to community-based lifestyle initiatives to change their lifestyle.Trial registrationISRCTN ISRCTN13046877. Registered 21 April 2022.
DOCUMENT
Aim: To explore 1) GPs´ motivation to refer to lifestyle interventions and to investigate the association between GPs’ own lifestyle-behaviors and their referral behavior, and 2) patient indicators in the decision-making process of the GPs’ referral to lifestyle interventions. Method: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 99 Dutch primary care GPs. Their motivation to refer was assessed by beliefs regarding lifestyle interventions. GPs’ referral behaviors were assessed - considering referral and self-reported actual referral - and their own lifestyle behaviors - physical activity, dieting, being overweight). Decision-making regarding referring patients to lifestyle interventions was assessed by imposed patient indicators, spontaneously suggested decisive patient indicators, and by case-based referring (vignettes).Results: A substantial group of GPs was not motivated for referral to lifestyle interventions. GPs’ refer behavior was significantly associated with their perceived subjective norm, behavioral control, and their own physical activity and diet. Most important patient indicators in referral to lifestyle interventions were somatic indicators, and patients’ motivation for lifestyle interventions.Conclusions: GPs motivation and referral behavior might be improved by providing them with tailored resources about evidence based lifestyle interventions, with support from allied health professionals, and with official guidelines for a more objective and systematic screening of patients.
DOCUMENT
The combination of self-tracking and persuasive eCoaching in healthy lifestyle interventions is a promising approach. The objective of this study is to map the key components of existing healthy lifestyle interventions combining self-tracking and persuasive eCoaching using the scoping review methodology in accordance with the York methodological framework by Arksey and O’Malley. Seven studies were included in this preliminary scoping review. Components related to persuasive eCoaching applied only in effective interventions were reduction of complex behavior into small steps, providing positive motivational feedback by praise and providing reliable information to show expertise. Concerning self-tracking, it did not seem to matter if more action was required by the participant to obtain personal data. The first results of this study indicate the necessity to identify the needs and problems of the specific target group of the interventions, due to differences found between various groups of users. In addition to objective data on lifestyle and health behavior, other factors need to be taken into account, such as the context of use, daily experiences, and feelings of the users.
DOCUMENT
For the needs analysis, an assessment of the national (and local) status quo in the area of Healthy Ageing, specifically towards Active and Healthy Lifestyles. This status quo will serve as important starting point for the exploration of a potential shared goal of the local community of practice. This needs analysis report includes generic sections towards definitions and methodologies, and an introduction towards the topics assessed. Secondly, national/ local chapters will outline the situation in the communities of Groningen (the Netherlands), Odense (Denmark), Malaga (Spain), Kaunas (Lithuania) and Cascais (Portugal). Within each local COP chapter the partners taking part of the COP are described and the shared goals illustrated. These shared goals are: COP Groningen: “stimulating a Healthy environment (physical & social) with focus on physical activity”. COP Odense: “further develop and educate professionals who work on stimulating physical activity in community dwelling older adult”’. COP Malaga: “developing, implementing and evaluating outdoor fitness” COP Kaunas: “to provide opportunities for primary school children and Kaunas district community members older than 50 more opportunities for exercising and physical activity” COP Cascais: “develop, organize for and together with the stakeholders and end users (youngsters from 12-24 years old) activities focused on healthy lifestyle (e.g., healthy cooking workshops, parent-child physical activities etc.) embedded in approach GERAÇÃO S+ “.
DOCUMENT
BACKGROUND: Among patients with coronary artery disease (CAD), improvement of lifestyle-related risk factors (LRFs) reduces cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. However, modification of LRFs is highly challenging.OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the impact of combining community-based lifestyle programs with regular hospital-based secondary prevention.METHODS: The authors performed a randomized controlled trial of nurse-coordinated referral of patients and their partners to 3 widely available community-based lifestyle programs, in 15 hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients admitted for acute coronary syndrome and/or revascularization, with ≥1 LRF (body mass index >27 kg/m(2), self-reported physical inactivity, and/or smoking) were included. All patients received guideline-based usual care. The intervention was based on 3 lifestyle programs for weight reduction, increasing physical activity, and smoking cessation. The primary outcome was the proportion of success at 12 months, defined as improvement in ≥1 qualifying LRF using weight (≥5% reduction), 6-min-walking distance (≥10% improvement), and urinary cotinine (200 ng/ml detection limit) without deterioration in the other 2.RESULTS: The authors randomized 824 patients. Complete data on the primary outcome were available in 711 patients. The proportion of successful patients in the intervention group was 37% (133 of 360) compared with 26% (91 of 351) in the control group (p = 0.002; risk ratio: 1.43; 95% confidence interval: 1.14 to 1.78). In the intervention group, partner participation was associated with a significantly greater success rate (46% vs. 34%; p = 0.03).CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with coronary artery disease, nurse-coordinated referral to a comprehensive set of community-based, widely available lifestyle interventions, with optional partner participation, leads to significant improvements in LRFs. (RESPONSE-2: Randomised Evaluation of Secondary Prevention by Outpatient Nurse SpEcialists 2; NTR3937).
DOCUMENT
Background: Insufficient amounts of physical activity is a risk factor for (recurrent) stroke. People with a stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) have a high risk of recurrent stroke and have lower levels of physical activity than their healthy peers. Though several reviews have looked at the effects of lifestyle interventions on a number of risk factors of recurrent stroke, the effectiveness of these interventions to increase the amounts of physical activity performed by people with stroke or TIA are still unclear. Therefore, the research question of this study was: what is the effect of lifestyle interventions on the level of physical activity performed by people with stroke or TIA? Method: A systematic review was conducted following the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. Pubmed, Embase and Cumulative Index for Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), were searched up to August 2018. Randomised controlled trials that compared lifestyle interventions, aimed to increase the amount of physical activity completed by participants with a stroke or TIA, with controls were included. The Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) score was used to assess the quality of the articles, and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) method for the best evidence synthesis. Results: Eleven trials (n = 2403) met the inclusion criteria. The quality of the trials was mostly high, with 8 (73%) of trials scoring ≥6 on the PEDro scale. The overall best evidence syntheses showed moderate quality evidence that lifestyle interventions do not lead to significant improvements in the physical activity level of people with stroke or TIA. There is low quality evidence that lifestyle interventions that specifically target physical activity are effective at improving the levels of physical activity of people with stroke or TIA. Conclusion: Based on the results of this review, general lifestyle interventions on their own seem insufficient in improving physical activity levels after stroke or TIA. Lifestyle interventions that specifically encourage increasing physical activity may be more effective. Further properly powered trials using objective physical activity measures are needed to determine the effectiveness of such interventions.
LINK
