Cargando…

Shared decision-making (SHARE-D) for healthy behaviour change: a feasibility study in general practice

BACKGROUND: Effective interventions are needed to support health behaviour change for cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention. Decision tools encourage behaviour change but their effectiveness when used in shared decision-making with health professionals (HPs) is unknown. AIM: To test the feasibilit...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cupples, Margaret E, Cole, Judith A, Hart, Nigel D, Heron, Neil, McKinley, Michelle C, Tully, Mark A
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Royal College of General Practitioners 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6184102/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30564717
http://dx.doi.org/10.3399/bjgpopen18X101517
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Effective interventions are needed to support health behaviour change for cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention. Decision tools encourage behaviour change but their effectiveness when used in shared decision-making with health professionals (HPs) is unknown. AIM: To test the feasibility of using a novel, paper-based tool for shared decision-making in initiating behaviour change. DESIGN & SETTING: A feasibility study in five general practices in Northern Ireland. METHOD: Adults with, or at high risk of, CVD were invited to discuss their diet and physical activity (PA) with an HP. Using a paper-based decision aid in shared decision-making about behaviour change, their capabilities, opportunities, and motivation were considered. Diet and PA were assessed at baseline, 1, and 3 months using the Dietary Instrument for Nutritional Education (DINE) and the Recent Physical Activity Questionnaire (RPAQ); accelerometers measured PA at baseline and 3 months. Semi-structured interviews, analysed thematically, explored participants’ and HPs’ views of the process. RESULTS: The positive response rate to study invitation was 28% (45/162); 23 were recruited (aged 43–74 years; 50% male; <40% met diet or PA recommendations); and 87% (20/23) completed the study. All interviewees valued the tool’s structure, succinct content, and facilitation of discussion. HPs’ sharing of relevant personal experience encouraged behaviour change; social responsibilities, health conditions, and beliefs restricted change. HPs’ workloads prohibited the tool’s routine use. CONCLUSION: Recruitment and completion rates suggest that using a novel, paper-based tool in shared decision-making for behaviour change is feasible. HPs’ workloads constrain its use in practice, but qualitative findings indicate its potential value. Cross-sector collaborative exploration of sustainable models to promote behaviour change is needed.