Search

BackgroundPeriodic prompts serve as tools for health behavior interventions to encourage and maintain behavior changes. Past literature reviews have examined periodic messages targeting specific behaviors (smoking, physical activity, diet, etc) or media (telephone, email, face-to-face, newsletter, etc) and have found them to be effective in impacting health behavior in the short term. ObjectiveOur goal was to review the literature related to periodic messaging and prompts in order to explore typical characteristics, assess the role of prompt timing, identify common theoretical models used, and identify characteristics associated with the effectiveness of periodic prompts. MethodsElectronic searches of PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science were conducted in October 2012 and May 2013. Database search terms included variant terms for periods, prompts, interventions, media, and health behaviors. ResultsForty-two of the 55 included research articles found that prompts resulted in significant positive behavioral outcomes for participants. Prompts were delivered via text messages, email, mailed communications, and in a few instances via phone. Generally, the provision of feedback and specific strategies to accomplish behavior change appears to be important for the success of periodic prompts. Rationale for prompt timing was rarely provided, although some studies did organize message content around days of the week or times perceived to be high risk for particular behaviors. Smoking cessation interventions tended to be organized around quit date. Among studies using theoretical models to inform their interventions, the transtheoretical model was most common. ConclusionsPeriodic messaging interventions yield positive results for short-term health behavior changes. Interventions including feedback and prompts that included strategies were more likely to report significantly positive outcomes. Work remains to better understand elements that make periodic prompts successful and whether they are effective in producing long-term outcomes.

Tools to briefly assess diet among US Spanish-speaking adults are needed to identify individuals at risk for cardiometabolic disease (CMD) related to diet. Two registered dietitian nutritionists (RDNs) recruited bilingual medical students to translate the validated Diet Risk Score (DRS) into Spanish (DRS-S). Participants were recruited from a federally qualified health center. Students administered the DRS-S and one 24-h recall (Automated Self-Administered 24-Hour (ASA24®) Dietary Assessment Tool) on one day; a second recall was administered within 1 week. Recalls were scored using the Healthy Eating Index (HEI)-2015, a measure of adherence to the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. Spearman correlations, weighted kappa, and ANOVA were conducted using SAS 9.4 to assess the relative validity of the DRS-S. Thirty-one Spanish-speaking adults (female: n = 17, 53%; mean age: 58 (42–69)) completed assessments. The mean DRS-S was 9 (SD = 4.2) (max: 27; higher score = higher risk) and the mean HEI-2015 score was 65.7 (SD = 9.7) (max: 100; higher score = lower risk), with significant agreement between measures (r: −0.45 (p = 0.01)), weighted kappa: −0.3 (p = 0.03). The DRS-S can be used in resource-constrained settings to assess diet for intervention and referral to RDNs. The DRS-S should be tested in clinical care to assess the impact of dietary changes to reduce CMD risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Emerging evidence suggests a heightened interest in healthy behaviour changes, including smoking cessation, at the beginning of the week. Evidence from Google searches, quitlines, and cessation websites show greater information-seeking and interest in early week quitting. Aims: This pilot assesses the comparative effectiveness of a smoking cessation intervention that encourages participants to use Mondays as a day to quit or recommit to quitting smoking. Methods: We partnered with existing smoking cessation group programs to conduct a quasi-experimental, pre–post study. Both comparison and intervention groups received the same standard-care curriculum from program instructors. Intervention group participants received Monday materials including a wallet card and a mantra card during enrolment. On Mondays, intervention participants received an emailed tip-of-the-week and were encouraged to quit or recommit to quitting. Quit buddies were recommended in both groups, but intervention participants were encouraged to check-in with quit buddies on Mondays. The outcomes of smoking abstinence, number and length of quit attempts, and self-efficacy were assessed at the final program session and three months later. Results: At the last session, intervention group participants who were still smoking had a higher self-efficacy of quitting in the future, rated their programs as more helpful in quitting smoking, and were more likely to rate quit buddies as very helpful. Differences in self-efficacy were no longer observed at the second follow-up. No differences were observed between intervention and standard group participants in abstinence, number of quits, length of quits, or self-efficacy of staying quit at either follow-up. Conclusions: Encouraging results from this pilot study indicate that further research is needed to explore how Monday messaging may improve smoking cessation programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To evaluate the impact of integrating patient-reported outcomes (PROs) into routine clinics, from the perspective of patients with RA, clinicians and other staff., Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study using a mixed methods sequential explanatory design at an academic arthritis clinic. RA patients completed selected Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System measures on tablets in the waiting room. Results were immediately available to discuss during the visit. Post-visit surveys with patients and physicians evaluated topics discussed and their impact on decision making; patients rated confidence in treatment. Focus groups or interviews with patients, treating rheumatologists and clinic staff were conducted to understand perspectives and experiences., Results: Some 196 patients and 20 rheumatologists completed post-visit surveys at 816 and 806 visits, respectively. Focus groups were conducted with 24 patients, 10 rheumatologists and 4 research/clinic staff. PROs influenced medical decision-making and RA treatment changes (38 and 18% of visits, respectively). Patients reported very high satisfaction and treatment confidence. Impact on clinical workflow was minimal after a period of initial adjustment. PROs were valued by patients and physicians, and provided new insight into how patients felt and functioned over time. Reviewing results together improved communication, and facilitated patient-centred care, shared decision making, and the identification of new symptoms and contributing psychosocial/behavioural factors., Conclusion: PRO use at RA visits was feasible, increased understanding of how disease affects how patients feel and function, facilitated shared decision-making, and was associated with high patient satisfaction and treatment confidence., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)