Changes in CVD risk factors in the activity counseling trial

Mental health benefits from lifestyle physical activity interventions: A systematic review

Lifestyle physical activity (LPA) interventions are a promising alternative to structured exercise interventions for addressing mental health problems. The authors conducted a systematic review of the literature on LPA interventions in any population in order to determine (a) the extent to which mental health outcomes were examined and (b) whether benefits in mental health outcomes were observed. Mental health outcomes were defined as depression, anxiety, perceived stress, health-related quality of life, and psychological well-being. A total of 73 articles were identified as LPA intervention, of which 24.7% (n = 18) reported the effect of LPA intervention on mental health outcomes. The most commonly evaluated mental health outcome was depression, and to a lesser extent anxiety and perceived stress. Overall, findings point to promising effects of LPA interventions across common mental health problems. Key areas for future research are discussed in light of emergent limitations in existing published studies.

The effectiveness of a proven chronic disease prevention and screening intervention in diverse and remote primary care settings: an implementation study on the BETTER 2 Program

Background

The Building on Existing Tools to Improve Chronic Disease Prevention and Screening in Primary Care (BETTER) randomised control trial (RCT) showed that the BETTER Program improved chronic disease prevention and screening (CDPS) by 32.5% in urban team-based primary care clinics.

Aim

To evaluate outcomes from implementation of BETTER in diverse clinical settings.

Design & setting

An implementation study was undertaken to apply the CDPS intervention from the BETTER trial to diverse settings in BETTER 2. Patients aged 40–65 years were invited to enrol in the study from three clinics in Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada.

Method

At baseline, eligibility for 27 CDPS actions (for example, cancer, diabetes and hypertension screening, lifestyle) was determined. Patients then met with a trained provider and prioritised goals to address their eligible CDPS actions. Providers received training in behaviour change theory and practice. Descriptive analysis of clinical outcomes and success factors were reported.

Results

A total of 154 patients (119 female and 35 male) had a baseline visit; 106 had complete outcome assessments, and the remainder had partial outcome assessments. At baseline, patients were eligible for a mean of 12.3 CDPS actions and achieved a mean of 6.0 (49%, 95% confidence intervals [CI] = 24% to 74%) at 6-month follow-up, including reduced hypertension (86% of eligible patients, 95% CI = 67% to 96%), weight control (51% of eligible patients, 95% CI = 42% to 60%), and smoking cessation (36% of eligible patients, 95% CI = 17% to 59%). Male, highly educated, and lower income individuals achieved a higher proportion of CDPS manoeuvers than their counterparts.

Conclusion

Clinical outcomes from this implementation study were comparable with those of the prior BETTER RCT, providing support for the BETTER Program as an effective approach to CDPS in more diverse general practice settings.

Risk scoring for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND

The current paradigm for cardiovascular disease (CVD) emphasises absolute risk assessment to guide treatment decisions in primary prevention. Although the derivation and validation of multivariable risk assessment tools, or CVD risk scores, have attracted considerable attention, their effect on clinical outcomes is uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of evaluating and providing CVD risk scores in adults without prevalent CVD on cardiovascular outcomes, risk factor levels, preventive medication prescribing, and health behaviours.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library (2016, Issue 2), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to March week 1 2016), Embase (embase.com) (1974 to 15 March 2016), and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (CPCI-S) (1990 to 15 March 2016). We imposed no language restrictions. We searched clinical trial registers in March 2016 and handsearched reference lists of primary studies to identify additional reports.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing the systematic provision of CVD risk scores by a clinician, healthcare professional, or healthcare system compared with usual care (i.e. no systematic provision of CVD risk scores) in adults without CVD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently selected studies, extracted data, and evaluated study quality. We used the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool to assess study limitations. The primary outcomes were: CVD events, change in CVD risk factor levels (total cholesterol, systolic blood pressure, and multivariable CVD risk), and adverse events. Secondary outcomes included: lipid-lowering and antihypertensive medication prescribing in higher-risk people. We calculated risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous data and mean differences (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMD) for continuous data using 95% confidence intervals. We used a fixed-effects model when heterogeneity (I²) was at least 50% and a random-effects model for substantial heterogeneity (I² > 50%). We evaluated the quality of evidence using the GRADE framework.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 41 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving 194,035 participants from 6422 reports. We assessed studies as having high or unclear risk of bias across multiple domains. Low-quality evidence evidence suggests that providing CVD risk scores may have little or no effect on CVD events compared with usual care (5.4% versus 5.3%; RR 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.95 to 1.08; I² = 25%; 3 trials, N = 99,070). Providing CVD risk scores may reduce CVD risk factor levels by a small amount compared with usual care. Providing CVD risk scores reduced total cholesterol (MD -0.10 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.20 to 0.00; I² = 94%; 12 trials, N = 20,437, low-quality evidence), systolic blood pressure (MD -2.77 mmHg, 95% CI -4.16 to -1.38; I² = 93%; 16 trials, N = 32,954, low-quality evidence), and multivariable CVD risk (SMD -0.21, 95% CI -0.39 to -0.02; I² = 94%; 9 trials, N = 9549, low-quality evidence). Providing CVD risk scores may reduce adverse events compared with usual care, but results were imprecise (1.9% versus 2.7%; RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.04; I² = 0%; 4 trials, N = 4630, low-quality evidence). Compared with usual care, providing CVD risk scores may increase new or intensified lipid-lowering medications (15.7% versus 10.7%; RR 1.47, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.87; I² = 40%; 11 trials, N = 14,175, low-quality evidence) and increase new or increased antihypertensive medications (17.2% versus 11.4%; RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.11; I² = 53%; 8 trials, N = 13,255, low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is uncertainty whether current strategies for providing CVD risk scores affect CVD events. Providing CVD risk scores may slightly reduce CVD risk factor levels and may increase preventive medication prescribing in higher-risk people without evidence of harm. There were multiple study limitations in the identified studies and substantial heterogeneity in the interventions, outcomes, and analyses, so readers should interpret results with caution. New models for implementing and evaluating CVD risk scores in adequately powered studies are needed to define the role of applying CVD risk scores in primary CVD prevention.

An Updated Review of Interventions that Include Promotion of Physical Activity for Adult Men

The marked disparity in life expectancy between men and women suggests men are a vulnerable group requiring targeted health promotion programs. As such, there is an increasing need for health promotion strategies that effectively engage men with their health and/or illness management. Programs that promote physical activity could significantly improve the health of men. Although George et al. (Sports Med 42(3):281, 30) reviewed physical activity programs involving adult males published between 1990 and 2010, developments in men's health have prompted the emergence of new sex- and gender-specific approaches targeting men. The purpose of this review was to: (1) extend and update the review undertaken by George et al. (Sports Med 42(3):281, 30) concerning the effectiveness of physical activity programs in males, and (2) evaluate the integration of gender-specific influences in the content, design, and delivery of men's health promotion programs. A search of MEDLINE, CINAHL, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library, and the SPORTDiscus databases for articles published between January 2010 and August 2014 was conducted. In total, 35 studies, involving evaluations of 31 programs, were identified. Findings revealed that a variety of techniques and modes of delivery could effectively promote physical activity among men. Though the majority of programs were offered exclusively to men, 12 programs explicitly integrated gender-related influences in male-specific programs in ways that recognized men's interests and preferences. Innovations in male-only programs that focus on masculine ideals and gender influences to engage men in increasing their physical activity hold potential for informing strategies to promote other areas of men's health.