The Role of Behavioral Economics in Improving Cardiovascular Health Behaviors and Outcomes

Self-management behavior strategy based on behavioral economics in patients with hypertension: a scoping review

Hypertensive patients often do not make the most favorable choices and behaviors for managing disease. Behavioral economics strategies offer new ideas for guiding patients toward health behavior. The scoping review aimed to summarize behavioral economics strategies designed to improve hypertension self-management behaviors. A literature search was conducted in September 2022 using the following electronic databases: Embase, Medline, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wan Fang Database for Chinese Periodicals, and CBM-SinoMed. We screened the literature for experimental studies written in Chinese or English reporting on BE strategies designed to improve self-management behavior in hypertension. We searched 17 820 records and included 18 articles in the final scoping review. We performed qualitative synthesis by the categories of choice architecture. The most common BE strategies were those targeting decision information and decision assistance, such as changing the presentation of information, making information visible, and providing reminders for actions. Most strategies targeted BP, diet, medication adherence, and physical activity behavior. Ten out of 18 studies reported statistically significant improvement in self-management behavior. Further research on BE strategies should focus on addressing the challenges, including changing the decision structure, encompassing a more comprehensive range of target behaviors, and examining the long-term effects of BE strategies.

Could nudges reduce health literacy disparities in CVD prevention? An experiment using alternative messages for CVD risk assessment screening

OBJECTIVE

To explore the effect of SMS nudge messages amongst people with varying health literacy on their intention to get a Heart Health Check.

METHODS

A 3 (Initial SMS: scarcity, regret, or control nudge) x 2 (Reminder SMS: social norm or control nudge) factorial design was used in a hypothetical online experiment. 705 participants eligible for Heart Health Checks were recruited. Outcomes included intention to attend a Heart Health Check and psychological responses.

RESULTS

In the control condition, people with lower health literacy had lower behavioural intentions compared to those with higher health literacy (p = .011). Scarcity and regret nudges closed this gap, resulting in similar intention levels for lower and higher health literacy. There was no interactive effect of the reminder nudge and health literacy (p = .724).

CONCLUSION

Scarcity and regret nudge messages closed the health literacy gap in behavioural intentions compared to a control message, while a reminder nudge had limited additional benefit. Health literacy should be considered in behavioural intervention evaluations to ensure health equity is addressed.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Results informed a national screening program using a universal precautions approach, where messages with higher engagement for lower health literacy groups were used in clinical practice.

Surgical appropriateness nudges: Developing behavioral science nudges to integrate appropriateness criteria into the decision making of spine surgeons

BACKGROUND

Substantial variation exists in surgeon decision making. In response, multiple specialty societies have established criteria for the appropriate use of spine surgery. Yet few strategies exist to facilitate routine use of appropriateness criteria by surgeons. Behavioral science nudges are increasingly used to enhance decision making by clinicians. We sought to design "surgical appropriateness nudges" to support routine use of appropriateness criteria for degenerative lumbar scoliosis and spondylolisthesis.

METHODS

The work reflected Stage I of the NIH Stage Model for Behavioral Intervention Development and involved an iterative, multi-method approach, emphasizing qualitative methods. Study sites included two large referral centers for spine surgery. We recruited spine surgeons from both sites for two rounds of focus groups. To produce preliminary nudge prototypes, we examined sources of variation in surgeon decision making (Focus Group 1) and synthesized existing knowledge of appropriateness criteria, behavioral science nudge frameworks, electronic tools, and the surgical workflow. We refined nudge prototypes via feedback from content experts, site leaders, and spine surgeons (Focus Group 2). Concurrently, we collected data on surgical practices and outcomes at study sites. We pilot tested the refined nudge prototypes among spine surgeons, and surveyed them about nudge applicability, acceptability, and feasibility (scale 1-5, 5 = strongly agree).

RESULTS

Fifteen surgeons participated in focus groups, giving substantive input and feedback on nudge design. Refined nudge prototypes included: individualized surgeon score cards (frameworks: descriptive social norms/peer comparison/feedback), online calculators embedded in the EHR (decision aid/mapping), a multispecialty case conference (injunctive norms/social influence), and a preoperative check (reminders/ salience of information/ accountable justification). Two nudges (score cards, preop checks) incorporated data on surgeon practices and outcomes. Six surgeons pilot tested the refined nudges, and five completed the survey (83%). The overall mean score was 4.0 (standard deviation [SD] 0.5), with scores of 3.9 (SD 0.5) for applicability, 4.1 (SD 0.5) for acceptability, and 4.0 (SD 0.5), for feasibility. Conferences had the highest scores 4.3 (SD 0.6) and calculators the lowest 3.9 (SD 0.4).

CONCLUSIONS

Behavioral science nudges might be a promising strategy for facilitating incorporation of appropriateness criteria into the surgical workflow of spine surgeons. Future stages in intervention development will test whether these surgical appropriateness nudges can be implemented in practice and influence surgical decision making.

Identifying the capabilities for creating next-generation registries: a guide for data leaders and a case for "registry science"

OBJECTIVE

The increasing demands for curated, high-quality research data are driving the emergence of a novel registry type. The need to assemble, curate, and export this data grows, and the conventional simplicity of registry models is driving the need for advanced, multimodal data registries-the dawn of the next-generation registry.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The article provides an outline of the technology roles and responsibilities needed for successful implementations of next-generation registries.

RESULTS

We propose a framework for the planning, construction, maintenance, and sustainability of this new registry type.

DISCUSSION

A rubric of organizational, computational, and human resource needs is discussed in detail, backed by over 40 years of combined in-the-field experiences by the authors.

CONCLUSIONS

A novel field, registry science, within the clinical research informatics domain, has arisen to offer its insights into conceiving, structuring, and sustaining this new breed of tools.

Use of Community Engagement Studios to Adapt a Hybrid Effectiveness-Implementation Study of Social Incentives and Physical Activity for the STEP Together Study

Physical activity is known to contribute to good health, but most adults in the United States do not meet recommended physical activity guidelines. Social incentive interventions that leverage insights from behavioral economics have increased physical activity in short-term trials, but there is limited evidence of their effectiveness in community settings or their long-term effectiveness. The STEP Together study is a Hybrid Type 1 effectiveness-implementation study to address these evidence and implementation gaps. This paper describes the process of adapting study procedures prior to the effectiveness trial using Community Engagement (CE) Studios, facilitated meetings during which community members provide feedback on research projects. Six CE Studios were held with community members from the priority population. They were conducted remotely because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Fifteen liaisons representing 13 community organizations and 21 community members from different neighborhoods in Philadelphia participated. Three elements of the study design were modified based on feedback from the CE Studios: lowering the age requirement for an 'older adult', clarifying the definition of family members to include second-degree relatives, and adding a 6-month survey. These adaptations will improve the fit of the effectiveness trial to the local context and improve participant engagement and retention. CE Studios can be used to adapt intervention strategies and other aspects of study design during hybrid implementation-effectiveness trials. This approach was successfully used with remote online participation due to the COVID-19 pandemic and serves as a model for future community-engaged implementation research.

Food Is Medicine: A Presidential Advisory From the American Heart Association

Unhealthy diets are a major impediment to achieving a healthier population in the United States. Although there is a relatively clear sense of what constitutes a healthy diet, most of the US population does not eat healthy food at rates consistent with the recommended clinical guidelines. An abundance of barriers, including food and nutrition insecurity, how food is marketed and advertised, access to and affordability of healthy foods, and behavioral challenges such as a focus on immediate versus delayed gratification, stand in the way of healthier dietary patterns for many Americans. Food Is Medicine may be defined as the provision of healthy food resources to prevent, manage, or treat specific clinical conditions in coordination with the health care sector. Although the field has promise, relatively few studies have been conducted with designs that provide strong evidence of associations between Food Is Medicine interventions and health outcomes or health costs. Much work needs to be done to create a stronger body of evidence that convincingly demonstrates the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different types of Food Is Medicine interventions. An estimated 90% of the $4.3 trillion annual cost of health care in the United States is spent on medical care for chronic disease. For many of these diseases, diet is a major risk factor, so even modest improvements in diet could have a significant impact. This presidential advisory offers an overview of the state of the field of Food Is Medicine and a road map for a new research initiative that strategically approaches the outstanding questions in the field while prioritizing a human-centered design approach to achieve high rates of patient engagement and sustained behavior change. This will ideally happen in the context of broader efforts to use a health equity-centered approach to enhance the ways in which our food system and related policies support improvements in health.

Investigating Rewards and Deposit Contract Financial Incentives for Physical Activity Behavior Change Using a Smartphone App: Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Financial incentive interventions for improving physical activity have proven to be effective but costly. Deposit contracts (in which participants pledge their own money) could be an affordable alternative. In addition, deposit contracts may have superior effects by exploiting the power of loss aversion. Previous research has often operationalized deposit contracts through loss framing a financial reward (without requiring a deposit) to mimic the feelings of loss involved in a deposit contract.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to disentangle the effects of incurring actual losses (through self-funding a deposit contract) and loss framing. We investigated whether incentive conditions are more effective than a no-incentive control condition, whether deposit contracts have a lower uptake than financial rewards, whether deposit contracts are more effective than financial rewards, and whether loss frames are more effective than gain frames.

METHODS

Healthy participants (N=126) with an average age of 22.7 (SD 2.84) years participated in a 20-day physical activity intervention. They downloaded a smartphone app that provided them with a personalized physical activity goal and either required a €10 (at the time of writing: €1=US $0.98) deposit up front (which could be lost) or provided €10 as a reward, contingent on performance. Daily feedback on incentive earnings was provided and framed as either a loss or gain. We used a 2 (incentive type: deposit or reward) × 2 (feedback frame: gain or loss) between-subjects factorial design with a no-incentive control condition. Our primary outcome was the number of days participants achieved their goals. The uptake of the intervention was a secondary outcome.

RESULTS

Overall, financial incentive conditions (mean 13.10, SD 6.33 days goal achieved) had higher effectiveness than the control condition (mean 8.00, SD 5.65 days goal achieved; P=.002; ηp2=0.147). Deposit contracts had lower uptake (29/47, 62%) than rewards (50/50, 100%; P<.001; Cramer V=0.492). Furthermore, 2-way analysis of covariance showed that deposit contracts (mean 14.88, SD 6.40 days goal achieved) were not significantly more effective than rewards (mean 12.13, SD 6.17 days goal achieved; P=.17). Unexpectedly, loss frames (mean 10.50, SD 6.22 days goal achieved) were significantly less effective than gain frames (mean 14.67, SD 5.95 days goal achieved; P=.007; ηp2=0.155).

CONCLUSIONS

Financial incentives help increase physical activity, but deposit contracts were not more effective than rewards. Although self-funded deposit contracts can be offered at low cost, low uptake is an important obstacle to large-scale implementation. Unexpectedly, loss framing was less effective than gain framing. Therefore, we urge further research on their boundary conditions before using loss-framed incentives in practice. Because of limited statistical power regarding some research questions, the results of this study should be interpreted with caution, and future work should be done to confirm these findings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Open Science Framework Registries osf.io/34ygt; https://osf.io/34ygt.