Sustained Long-Term Efficacy of Motivational Counseling and Text Message Reminders on Daily Sitting Time in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis: Long-Term Follow-up of a Randomized, Parallel-Group Trial

Behavioral weight loss interventions for people with physical disabilities: A systematic review

AIM

The aim of this study is to examine which interventions lead to clinically significant weight loss among people with physical disabilities.

METHODS

We systematically searched three electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, and CENTRAL) including studies until May 2022 to find randomized controlled trials on behavioral interventions and weight-related outcomes in people with physical disabilities. Pharmacological or surgical interventions were excluded. Study quality was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Interventions were grouped as dietary, physical activity, education/coaching, or multi-component. Mean weight changes, standard deviations, confidence intervals, and effect sizes were extracted or calculated for assessment of the intervention effect.

RESULTS

Sixty studies involving 6,511 participants were included in the qualitative synthesis. Most studies (n = 32) included multi-component interventions, incorporating dietary and physical activity components. Limited evidence suggests that extensive dietary interventions or long-term multi-component interventions might lead to a clinically relevant weight reduction of at least 5% for older individuals (age > 50) with mild-to-moderate mobility impairments.

DISCUSSION

Due to the high heterogeneity of studies and low study quality, it can be assumed that the range of applicability of the findings is questionable. Further research should examine younger age groups (i.e., children, adolescents, and adults under 40 years) and compare different settings such as schools, clinics, nursing homes, and assisted living facilities.

Defining and operationalizing personalized psychological treatment - a systematic literature review

This systematic literature review aimed to propose a definition of personalized psychological treatment and to suggest how the definition can be operationalized. PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched up to 11 December 2023 for studies in which a definition of personalized psychological treatment was included or a systematic operationalization of personalized psychological treatment was described. Based on a narrative synthesis of the collected definitions, summary categories were developed that informed the proposed definition. Operationalizations were described according to what aspect of treatment, how and when treatment was personalized. The extent to which the operationalizations deviated from the proposed definition was assessed. Thirty-four studies with definitions and 200 with operationalizations were included. The following definition was proposed: personalized psychological treatment aims to optimize treatment outcome for the individual patient by tailoring treatment to unique or specific needs, preferences or other characteristics and includes a systematic adaptation of treatment or a differentiation between treatment strategies. Based on the operationalizations, timing of personalization, specification of the systematic approach and treatment elements that could be personalized were added to the proposed definition. Evidence-based personalization of psychological treatments can be enhanced by clear operationalization based on a comprehensive definition of personalization.

Physical activity guidance in the rheumatology clinic-what matters for patients with rheumatoid arthritis? A qualitative study

Higher proportions of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are physically inactive compared to the general population. A barrier to engaging in physical activity (PA) may be lack of consistent PA guidance from health professionals (HPRs). This qualitative study aimed to explore daily PA levels and the patients' perspectives on current and future PA guidance from HPRs. We recruited 20 participants from five rheumatology departments in Denmark. The participants differed in socio-demography and clinical characteristics based on results from an earlier cross-sectional study. The interviews were conducted by telephone, online platforms or face-to-face. Data analysis was based on reflexive thematic analysis. Thirteen participants were female and mean age was 55 years. We generated four themes; (1) Acceptance of the arthritis is a process, which attributed to acknowledging RA as part of life before fully engagement in PA and exercise. (2) Daily physical activity-motivation, barriers and benefits, reflecting the participants' preferred types of activities and motivations and barriers to PA. (3) Physical activity guidance-your own responsibility? This theme reflected how participants missed more comprehensive discussions with HPRs about PA. (4) It is essential how, when and where physical activity guidance is provided, referring to participants' preferences for future PA guidance in the rheumatology clinic. The study emphasizes that an integrated focus on PA should be part of the rheumatology clinic. However, HPRs may need adequate training in how to guide and motivate patients with RA towards increased PA.

Physiology of sedentary behavior

Sedentary behaviors (SB) are characterized by low energy expenditure while in a sitting or reclining posture. Evidence relevant to understanding the physiology of SB can be derived from studies employing several experimental models: bed rest, immobilization, reduced step count, and reducing/interrupting prolonged SB. We examine the relevant physiological evidence relating to body weight and energy balance, intermediary metabolism, cardiovascular and respiratory systems, the musculoskeletal system, the central nervous system, and immunity and inflammatory responses. Excessive and prolonged SB can lead to insulin resistance, vascular dysfunction, shift in substrate use toward carbohydrate oxidation, shift in muscle fiber from oxidative to glycolytic type, reduced cardiorespiratory fitness, loss of muscle mass and strength and bone mass, and increased total body fat mass and visceral fat depot, blood lipid concentrations, and inflammation. Despite marked differences across individual studies, longer term interventions aimed at reducing/interrupting SB have resulted in small, albeit marginally clinically meaningful, benefits on body weight, waist circumference, percent body fat, fasting glucose, insulin, HbA1c and HDL concentrations, systolic blood pressure, and vascular function in adults and older adults. There is more limited evidence for other health-related outcomes and physiological systems and for children and adolescents. Future research should focus on the investigation of molecular and cellular mechanisms underpinning adaptations to increasing and reducing/interrupting SB and the necessary changes in SB and physical activity to impact physiological systems and overall health in diverse population groups.

Efficacy of non-pharmacological interventions: a systematic review informing the 2023 EULAR recommendations for the management of fatigue in people with inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases

OBJECTIVE

To identify the best evidence on the efficacy of non-pharmacological interventions in reducing fatigue in people with inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (I-RMDs) and to summarise their safety in the identified studies to inform European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology recommendations for the management of fatigue in people with I-RMDs.

METHODS

Systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) including adults with I-RMDs conducted according to the Cochrane Handbook. Search strategy ran in Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL Complete, PEDro, OTseeker and PsycINFO. Assessment of risk of bias, data extraction and synthesis were performed by two reviewers independently. Data were pooled in meta-analyses.

RESULTS

From a total of 4150 records, 454 were selected for full-text review, 82 fulfilled the inclusion criteria and 55 RCTs were included in meta-analyses. Physical activity or exercise was efficacious in reducing fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) (standardised mean differences (SMD)=-0.23, 95% CI=-0.37 to -0.1), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) (SMD=-0.54, 95% CI=-1.07 to -0.01) and spondyloarthritis (SMD=-0.94, 95% CI=-1.23 to -0.66); reduction of fatigue was not significant in Sjögren's syndrome (SMD=-0.83, 95% CI=-2.13 to 0.47) and systemic sclerosis (SMD=-0.66, 95% CI=-1.33 to 0.02). Psychoeducational interventions were efficacious in reducing fatigue in RA (SMD=-0.32, 95% CI=-0.48 to -0.16), but not in SLE (SMD=-0.19, 95% CI=-0.46 to 0.09). Follow-up models in consultations (SMD=-0.05, 95% CI=-0.29 to 0.20) and multicomponent interventions (SMD=-0.20, 95% CI=-0.53 to 0.14) did not show significant reductions of fatigue in RA. The results of RCTs not included in the meta-analysis suggest that several other non-pharmacological interventions may provide a reduction of fatigue, with reassuring safety results.

CONCLUSIONS

Physica activity or exercise and psychoeducational interventions are efficacious and safe for managing fatigue in people with I-RMDs.

The behavioural epidemiology of sedentary behaviour in inflammatory arthritis: where are we, and where do we need to go?

In the last decade, studies into sedentary behaviour in inflammatory arthritis have raised important questions regarding its role in this condition. Specifically, evidence is needed on whether sedentary behaviour might exacerbate adverse inflammatory arthritis outcomes, and whether reducing sedentary behaviour might offer an effective avenue for self-management in this population. Research exploring these important research questions is still very much in its infancy and lacks the direction and scientific rigour required to inform effective intervention design, delivery and evaluation. Behavioural epidemiology refers to research that aims explicitly to understand and influence health behaviour patterns to prevent disease and improve health. To this end, the Behavioural Epidemiology Framework specifies a focused approach to health behaviour research, which leads to the development of evidence-based interventions directed at specific populations. In this review, we introduce the Behavioural Epidemiology Framework in the context of research into sedentary behaviour in inflammatory arthritis and ask: where are we, and where do we need to go?

Characteristics of participants and decliners from a randomized controlled trial on physical activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a retrospective register-based cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

A randomized controlled trial [Joint Resources - Sedentary Behaviour (JR-SB) intervention] aimed to reduce sedentary behaviour and increase light-intensity physical activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) through motivational counselling and text messages. Since a large proportion of invited patients declined to participate, this study aims to compare sociodemographic, clinical, and lifestyle factors between included patients and patients declining to participate (non-participants) in the JR-SB study and to investigate which characteristics were associated with participation.

METHOD

A register-based cross-sectional study was conducted. All patients invited to participate in the JR-SB study were identified in the DANBIO registry, from which patients' clinical and lifestyle data were also retrieved. Data on sociodemography and comorbidity were extracted from national registers. Differences between participants and non-participants were determined by an independent t-test or a chi-squared test. Logistic regression analyses adjusted for various confounders tested the association of patient characteristics with the likelihood of participation in the JR-SB study.

RESULTS

A total of 467 (58%) declined participation in the JR-SB study. Non-participants were older and less educated, more were smokers, fewer performed regular physical activity, and more had comorbidity compared to participants. Regression analyses showed that a higher educational level and absence of comorbidity in particular were associated with participation in the JR-SB study.

CONCLUSION

Patients with RA who are less educated and with certain types of comorbidity are less motivated to participate in a physical activity intervention. The findings may inform the recruitment process and implementation of physical activity interventions in rheumatology clinical practice.

Cost-effectiveness of motivational counselling and text reminders in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: results based on a randomised clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of an individually tailored intervention consisting of motivational counselling and text message reminders to reduce sedentary behaviour in comparison with usual lifestyle in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

RA patients (n=150) were randomised to the intervention or control group. Costs of the intervention and healthcare utilisation during a 22-month follow-up period were reported. Outcomes were objectively measured as 24 hours/7 days sitting time and self-reported Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and EQ-5D scores at baseline, and 16 weeks, 10 and 22 months after baseline. Cost-effectiveness was reported as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and statistical uncertainty presented as cost-effectiveness acceptability curves.

RESULTS

The intervention cost was estimated at €387 per participant. The mean incremental 22-month healthcare cost was €-1165 (95% bootstrap CI -5613 to 3283). An incremental 20%-point of the participants (CI 10.4% to 29.6%) reduced their daily sitting time more than 50 min and 36%-point reported better HAQ scores (change>0.22). The time-weighted health utilities (quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)) increased by 0.10 (CI 0.02 to 0.18) and 0.11 (CI 0.04 to 0.19) for EQ-5D index and EQ-VAS, respectively. The intervention dominated usual lifestyle by offering better outcomes and lower costs. With a threshold value of €30 000/QALY the intervention has a probability of 95% of being cost-effective.

CONCLUSION

This protocolised cost-effectiveness analysis showed that an individually tailored intervention aimed at reducing sedentary behaviour in patients with RA is improving participants' 22-month health status and reducing healthcare costs. These results suggest that the intervention should be implemented in routine rheumatology care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01969604.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Efficacy and Acceptability of Intermittent Aerobic Exercise on Polysomnography-Measured Sleep in People With Rheumatoid Arthritis With Self-Reported Sleep Disturbance: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Objective

This study's objective was to investigate the efficacy and acceptability of intermittent aerobic exercise training on sleep parameters, fatigue, pain, depressive symptoms, physical function, and cardiorespiratory fitness in people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods

Thirty‐eight people with RA were assigned to intermittent aerobic exercise training (three sessions/week for 6 weeks; intervention group, n = 17) or usual care (control group, n = 21). The primary outcome was a change in polysomnography‐assessed sleep efficiency from baseline to the end of the intervention. Secondary outcomes were sleep quality (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index), fatigue (Bristol Rheumatoid Arthritis Fatigue Multi‐Dimensional Questionnaire), depression (Center for Epidemiological Studies‐Depression), and cardiorespiratory fitness (watt max test).

Results

No between‐group differences were found in changes in polysomnography‐assessed sleep efficiency (0.04; 95% confidence interval [CI]: −0.02 to 0.09, P = 0.17). In the intervention group, sleep efficiency was improved significantly from baseline (0.84; 95% CI: 0.80‐0.88) compared with the end of the intervention (6 weeks) (0.88; 95% CI: 0.85‐0.92); however, there was no significant difference in the control group. Fatigue and depression measures were significantly lower in the intervention group than in the control group. Between‐group differences were overall fatigue (−16.1; 95% CI: −25.1 to −7.0, P = 0.001), physical fatigue (−5.0; 95% CI: −7.3 to −2.7, P = 0.0001), cognitive fatigue (−2.4; 95% CI: −4.2 to 0.6, P = 0.009), living with fatigue (−2.5; 95% CI: −4.5 to −0.5, P = 0.01), and depressive symptoms (−6.8; 95% CI: −12.4 to −1.1, P = 0.02).

Conclusion

The intervention yielded no significantly better sleep efficiency compared with usual care. However, aspects of fatigue, including physical and cognitive fatigue, and depressive symptoms were significantly improved in the intervention group.

Culturally adapted evidence-based treatments for adults with substance use problems: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This systematic review/meta-analysis aimed to synthesize empirical evidence from randomized controlled trials on the efficacy of culturally adapted interventions (CAIs) for substance use and related consequences for adults of color.

METHODS

Six electronic databases were searched to identify eligible studies. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risks of bias. We used robust variance estimation in meta-regression to synthesize effect size estimates and conduct moderator analyses.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. The overall effect size was 0.23 (95 % Confidence Interval [CI] = 0.12, 0.35). The subgroup effect sizes for comparing CAIs with inactive controls and with active controls were 0.31 (CI = 0.14, 0.48) and 0.14 (CI=-0.02, 0.29), respectively. The effect sizes for alcohol use, illicit drug use, unspecified substance use outcomes, and substance use related consequences were 0.25 (CI = 0.08, 0.43), 0.35 (CI =-0.30, 1.00), 0.22 (CI=-0.17, 0.62), and 0.02 (CI=-0.11, 0.16), respectively. Moderator analysis showed that CAIs' effects might not vary significantly by treatment model, dose, country, follow-up assessment timing, participant age, or gender/sex.

CONCLUSIONS

Research on substance use interventions that are culturally adapted for people of color is growing, and more high-quality studies are needed to draw definitive conclusions about CAIs' treatment effects. Our study found CAIs to be a promising approach for reducing substance use and related consequences. We call for more efficacy/effectiveness and implementation research to further advance the development and testing of evidence-based CAIs that meet the unique needs and sociocultural preferences of diverse populations.

Participant evaluation of a behavioral intervention targeting reduction of sedentary behavior in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a mixed methods study

Purpose: The "Joint Resources - Sedentary Behavior Study" (JR-SB) revealed significant behavioral and cardio-metabolic effects of reducing daily sedentary behavior replaced by light-intensity physical activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. This study explores the participant perception and experiences of the intervention and impact on the participants' health, family and physical activity behavior.Materials and Methods: A mixed-methods study design, including quantitative and qualitative data, was applied. Quantitative data were collected post-intervention using a questionnaire (n = 69) evaluating experiences of participation in the intervention. By maximum variation sampling, 18 participants were recruited to three focus group interviews with discussions of intervention elements. Data from the two sub-studies were collected and analyzed separately, although integrated at the interpretation and reporting level.Results: Based on four overarching themes, results indicated participant satisfaction with the individually tailored, behavioral approach and the focus on light-intensity physical activity rather than higher intensities. Study participation had an additional positive impact on the behaviors of family and social relations. Conversely, the family motivated the participants to achieve their physical activity goals.Conclusions: The study results support the use of individually tailored and behavioral approaches to reduce sedentary behavior, increase light-intensity physical activity and improve physical abilities in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONThis paper presents positive participant perception and motivation for an individually tailored, behavioural intervention that aimed to reduce sedentary behaviour replaced by light-intensity physical activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.The results indicate that especially the focus on light-intensity physical activity, a consistent focus on the individual's everyday life and continuous support from health professionals motivated the participants to reduce their daily sedentary behaviour - also in the long term.Involvement of participants' family members seems to have influence on their own physical activity behavior as well as on the participants' motivation for changing physical activity behavior.Together with earlier evidence, the results underpin the use of behavioural strategies to support patients with rheumatoid arthritis in achieving their physical activity goals and in improving the abilities needed to manage their everyday lives.

Physical Activity Assessment and Recommendation for Adults With Arthritis by Primary Care Providers-DocStyles, 2018

PURPOSE

To examine primary care providers' (PCPs) physical activity assessment and recommendation behaviors for adults with arthritis.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional.

SETTING

2018 DocStyles online national market research survey of US physicians and nurse practitioners.

SAMPLE

1,389 PCPs seeing adults with arthritis.

MEASURES

2 independent behaviors (assessment and recommendation) as 3 non-mutually exclusive groups: "always assesses," "always recommends," and "both" ("always assesses and recommends").

ANALYSIS

Calculated percentages of each group (overall and by PCP characteristics), and multivariable-adjusted prevalence ratios (PRs) using binary logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among PCPs, 49.2% always assessed and 57.7% always recommended physical activity; 39.7% did both. Across all 3 groups, percentages were highest for seeing ≥20 adults with arthritis weekly ("both": 56.4%; "always assesses": 66.7%; "always recommends": 71.3%) and lowest among obstetrician/gynecologists ("both": 26.9%; "always assesses": 36.8%; "always recommends": 40.7%). Multivariable-adjusted associations were strongest for seeing ≥20 adults with arthritis weekly (referent: 1-9 adults) and each of "always assesses" (PR = 1.5 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.3-1.8] and "both" (PR = 1.6 [95% CI: 1.4-1.9]).

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately 40% of PCPs sampled always engaged in both behaviors (assessing and recommending physical activity) with adults with arthritis; seeing a high volume of adults with arthritis was consistently related to engaging in each behavior. Evidence-based approaches to support PCP counseling include offering provider education and training, raising awareness of available resources, and using health system supports.

Management of Fatigue in Rheumatoid Arthritis

Fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis is highly prevalent. It is correlated only weakly with disease activity but more so with pain, mood, personality features, poor sleep, obesity and comorbidities. Fatigue can be measured by many standardised questionnaires and more easily with a Visual Analogue Scale or numeric rating scale. Most patients with RA have some fatigue, and at least one in six have severe fatigue. Chronic pain and depressed mood are also common in RA patients with significant fatigue. It affects function and quality of life and is worse on average in women. Evidence-based treatment for fatigue includes treatment of underlying disease activity (with on average modest improvement of fatigue), exercise programmes and supervised self-management programmes with cognitive-behavioural therapy, mindfulness and reinforcement (such as reminders). The specific programmes for exercise and behavioural interventions are not standardised. Some medications cause fatigue such as methotrexate. More research is needed to understand fatigue and how to treat this common complex symptom in RA that can be the worst symptom for some patients.

Development and evaluation of the sedentary behavior and light-intensity physical activity questionnaire

[Purpose] To describe our newly developed Sedentary Behavior and Light-Intensity Physical Activity Questionnaire and examine its reliability and validity. [Participants and Methods] We identified and selected self-reported items through a literature review and interviews with 11 inactive individuals. Thirty-one individuals with lower limb prostheses and an expert panel assessed the content validity of the integrated items and identified 17 items. Patients who had undergone lower limb surgeries were regarded as inactive individuals, and 112 patients completed the questionnaire twice for test-retest reliability and wore an accelerometer for criterion validity. The ethics committee of Kyushu University approved this study (2019-126 and 2019-273). [Results] Item analysis was revised to the Sedentary Behavior and Light-Intensity Physical Activity Questionnaire-10 (six light-intensity physical activity and four sedentary behavior items) because of the floor effect. The test-retest correlation coefficient showed high reliability. Moderate to weak correlation coefficient was observed between the questionnaire and accelerometer (light-intensity physical activity: 0.43 and sedentary behavior: 0.20), and the Bland-Altman plots indicated no bias. [Conclusion] The Sedentary Behavior and Light-Intensity Physical Activity Questionnaire-10 had acceptable validity and reliability among inactive individuals and it could be used for studying light-intensity physical activity.

Correlations of fatigue in Danish patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and spondyloarthritis

Objective

To describe fatigue in relation to disease-specific and socioeconomic factors and to test possible correlations between fatigue and work impairment, quality of life, pain, sleep, depression, and physical functioning in people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA).

Methods

A questionnaire-based cross-sectional survey collecting patient characteristics such as disease characteristics, socioeconomic factors and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from patients with RA, PsA and axSpA in Denmark. PRO scales included the FACIT-Fatigue sub-scale, Work Productivity and Activity Impairment scale (WPAI), EuroQol (EQ-5D), Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale (MOS), Major Depression Inventory (MDI), and Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ). Respondents were recruited via routine visits to the outpatient rheumatology clinic; information on diagnosis, treatment and disease activity was collected from medical journals by trained nurses.

Results

487 patients participated in the study. Fatigue was more present in women, experienced patients, and patients who changed medication in the past 12 months, who were unemployed, who had less education, and who had lower household income. There was no statistically significant difference between mean fatigue in the three diagnostic groups (p = 0.08). Fatigue correlated with all included PROs (Pearson correlation coefficients, p<0.0001). Stratifying for diagnosis and adjusting for socioeconomic factors did not change the conclusion.

Conclusion

In a stable, representative group of patients with RA, PsA and axSpA, we found significant correlations between fatigue and work impairment, quality of life, pain, sleep, depression and physical functioning. Fatigue cannot be perceived as a single problem, but rather as a symptom that affects broadly.

Interventions outside the workplace for reducing sedentary behaviour in adults under 60 years of age

BACKGROUND

Adults spend a majority of their time outside the workplace being sedentary. Large amounts of sedentary behaviour increase the risk of type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and both all-cause and cardiovascular disease mortality.

OBJECTIVES

Primary • To assess effects on sedentary time of non-occupational interventions for reducing sedentary behaviour in adults under 60 years of age Secondary • To describe other health effects and adverse events or unintended consequences of these interventions • To determine whether specific components of interventions are associated with changes in sedentary behaviour • To identify if there are any differential effects of interventions based on health inequalities (e.g. age, sex, income, employment) SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, CINAHL, PsycINFO, SportDiscus, and ClinicalTrials.gov on 14 April 2020. We checked references of included studies, conducted forward citation searching, and contacted authors in the field to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster RCTs of interventions outside the workplace for community-dwelling adults aged 18 to 59 years. We included studies only when the intervention had a specific aim or component to change sedentary behaviour.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened titles/abstracts and full-text articles for study eligibility. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We contacted trial authors for additional information or data when required. We examined the following primary outcomes: device-measured sedentary time, self-report sitting time, self-report TV viewing time, and breaks in sedentary time.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 13 trials involving 1770 participants, all undertaken in high-income countries. Ten were RCTs and three were cluster RCTs. The mean age of study participants ranged from 20 to 41 years. A majority of participants were female. All interventions were delivered at the individual level. Intervention components included personal monitoring devices, information or education, counselling, and prompts to reduce sedentary behaviour. We judged no study to be at low risk of bias across all domains. Seven studies were at high risk of bias for blinding of outcome assessment due to use of self-report outcomes measures. Primary outcomes Interventions outside the workplace probably show little or no difference in device-measured sedentary time in the short term (mean difference (MD) -8.36 min/d, 95% confidence interval (CI) -27.12 to 10.40; 4 studies; I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether interventions reduce device-measured sedentary time in the medium term (MD -51.37 min/d, 95% CI -126.34 to 23.59; 3 studies; I² = 84%; very low-certainty evidence) We are uncertain whether interventions outside the workplace reduce self-report sitting time in the short term (MD -64.12 min/d, 95% CI -260.91 to 132.67; I² = 86%; very low-certainty evidence). Interventions outside the workplace may show little or no difference in self-report TV viewing time in the medium term (MD -12.45 min/d, 95% CI -50.40 to 25.49; 2 studies; I² = 86%; low-certainty evidence) or in the long term (MD 0.30 min/d, 95% CI -0.63 to 1.23; 2 studies; I² = 0%; low-certainty evidence). It was not possible to pool the five studies that reported breaks in sedentary time given the variation in definitions used. Secondary outcomes Interventions outside the workplace probably have little or no difference on body mass index in the medium term (MD -0.25 kg/m², 95% CI -0.48 to -0.01; 3 studies; I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). Interventions may have little or no difference in waist circumference in the medium term (MD -2.04 cm, 95% CI -9.06 to 4.98; 2 studies; I² = 65%; low-certainty evidence). Interventions probably have little or no difference on glucose in the short term (MD -0.18 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.30 to -0.06; 2 studies; I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence) and medium term (MD -0.08 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.21 to 0.05; 2 studies, I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence) Interventions outside the workplace may have little or no difference in device-measured MVPA in the short term (MD 1.99 min/d, 95% CI -4.27 to 8.25; 4 studies; I² = 23%; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether interventions improve device-measured MVPA in the medium term (MD 6.59 min/d, 95% CI -7.35 to 20.53; 3 studies; I² = 70%; very low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether interventions outside the workplace improve self-reported light-intensity PA in the short-term (MD 156.32 min/d, 95% CI 34.34 to 278.31; 2 studies; I² = 79%; very low-certainty evidence). Interventions may have little or no difference on step count in the short-term (MD 226.90 steps/day, 95% CI -519.78 to 973.59; 3 studies; I² = 0%; low-certainty evidence) No data on adverse events or symptoms were reported in the included studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Interventions outside the workplace to reduce sedentary behaviour probably lead to little or no difference in device-measured sedentary time in the short term, and we are uncertain if they reduce device-measured sedentary time in the medium term. We are uncertain whether interventions outside the workplace reduce self-reported sitting time in the short term. Interventions outside the workplace may result in little or no difference in self-report TV viewing time in the medium or long term. The certainty of evidence is moderate to very low, mainly due to concerns about risk of bias, inconsistent findings, and imprecise results. Future studies should be of longer duration; should recruit participants from varying age, socioeconomic, or ethnic groups; and should gather quality of life, cost-effectiveness, and adverse event data. We strongly recommend that standard methods of data preparation and analysis are adopted to allow comparison of the effects of interventions to reduce sedentary behaviour.

Prevention and adherence in Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal disease

Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases (RMDs) are chronic conditions that affect a substantial number of people. RMDs are significantly related to co-morbidity. Therefore, focusing on prevention in RMDs is of importance to promote and maintain health. Prevention includes primary-, secondary-, tertiary-, and clinical prevention. Primary prevention aims to prevent the onset of disease before the disease process begins, secondary prevention includes detecting and reducing disease and risk factors at the earliest possible point, and tertiary prevention aims to limit the influence of a recognized or verified disease and to address or reduce further development or worsening of the disease, including physical and psychosocial disability. Clinical prevention attempts to integrate prevention into the disease management to limit disease progression and prevent complications and relapse. This chapter will focus on the evidence for prevention and highlight how innovations and trends can contribute by using digital technologies as an example.