Optimisation of the ActWELL lifestyle intervention programme for women attending routine NHS breast screening clinics.
Aged
Behavior Therapy
/ methods
Body Mass Index
Breast Neoplasms
/ prevention & control
Early Detection of Cancer
/ methods
Exercise
Feasibility Studies
Female
Government Programs
Humans
Life Style
Middle Aged
Preventive Health Services
/ methods
Program Evaluation
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Risk Reduction Behavior
State Medicine
United Kingdom
Weight Loss
Body weight
Breast cancer
Intervention
Lifestyle
Physical activity
Journal
Trials
ISSN: 1745-6215
Titre abrégé: Trials
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101263253
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 Jun 2020
05 Jun 2020
Historique:
received:
30
01
2020
accepted:
11
05
2020
entrez:
7
6
2020
pubmed:
7
6
2020
medline:
2
3
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Around 30% of post-menopausal breast cancer is related to excess body fat, alcohol intake and low levels of physical activity. Current estimates suggest that there is a 12% increased risk in post-menopausal breast cancer for every 5 kg/m A feasibility study of a prototype programme aiming to change lifestyle behaviours was successfully undertaken. The programme used educational approaches and behaviour change techniques delivered by lifestyle coaches using individual face to face meetings and telephone sessions. To optimise the intervention for a definitive randomised controlled trial of weight management, data from the feasibility trial, focus group discussions conducted with the target population, feedback from the trial public advisory group and comments from peer reviewers were obtained. Concepts from implementation research provided further guidance to assist in the refinement of the intervention, which was then discussed and agreed by all investigators and the Trial Steering Group. The results from the feasibility trial were considered appropriate for moving on to a full trial with 70% of participants finding the programme acceptable. The primary outcomes (weight loss and physical activity) provided an important focus for design input from the target group. The contributions highlighted the need to review programme duration, coach contact time, content and use of behaviour change techniques and communications generally (e.g. science and evidence, non-judgemental approaches and avoiding guilt). In addition, the need for emphasis on support rather than education became apparent. The recommendations from peer reviewers focussed on the magnitude of effort required to achieve the intended weight loss and weight loss maintenance. Implementation science supported the use of the capability/opportunity/motivation (COM-B)model in overall design. The optimisation process has facilitated the development and evaluation of a programme that enables the delivery of a promising intervention to achieve weight management in post-menopausal women. ISRCTN: ISRCTN11057518. Registered on 21 July 2017. Retrospectively registered.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Around 30% of post-menopausal breast cancer is related to excess body fat, alcohol intake and low levels of physical activity. Current estimates suggest that there is a 12% increased risk in post-menopausal breast cancer for every 5 kg/m
METHODS
METHODS
A feasibility study of a prototype programme aiming to change lifestyle behaviours was successfully undertaken. The programme used educational approaches and behaviour change techniques delivered by lifestyle coaches using individual face to face meetings and telephone sessions. To optimise the intervention for a definitive randomised controlled trial of weight management, data from the feasibility trial, focus group discussions conducted with the target population, feedback from the trial public advisory group and comments from peer reviewers were obtained. Concepts from implementation research provided further guidance to assist in the refinement of the intervention, which was then discussed and agreed by all investigators and the Trial Steering Group.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The results from the feasibility trial were considered appropriate for moving on to a full trial with 70% of participants finding the programme acceptable. The primary outcomes (weight loss and physical activity) provided an important focus for design input from the target group. The contributions highlighted the need to review programme duration, coach contact time, content and use of behaviour change techniques and communications generally (e.g. science and evidence, non-judgemental approaches and avoiding guilt). In addition, the need for emphasis on support rather than education became apparent. The recommendations from peer reviewers focussed on the magnitude of effort required to achieve the intended weight loss and weight loss maintenance. Implementation science supported the use of the capability/opportunity/motivation (COM-B)model in overall design.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The optimisation process has facilitated the development and evaluation of a programme that enables the delivery of a promising intervention to achieve weight management in post-menopausal women.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
ISRCTN: ISRCTN11057518. Registered on 21 July 2017. Retrospectively registered.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32503606
doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04405-z
pii: 10.1186/s13063-020-04405-z
pmc: PMC7275549
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
484Subventions
Organisme : Chief Scientist Office
ID : HSRU1
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Scottish Government
ID : BC/Screening/17/01)
Références
The Health Foundation. 2016. https://www.health.org.uk/sites/default/files/AHealthierLifeForAll.pdf . Accessed 22 Aug 2019.
NICE. https://pathways.nice.org.uk/pathways/cardiovascular-disease-prevention/lifestyle-changes-for-preventing-cardiovascular-disease Accessed 22 Aug 2019.
NICE. 2017. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ph38 . Accessed 22 Aug 2019.
World Cancer Research Fund. 2018. https://www.wcrf.org/dietandcancer/about . Accessed 22 Aug 2019.
Cancer Research UK. 2016. https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/statistics-by-cancer-type/breast-cancer#heading-Zero . Accessed 22 Aug 2019.
Howell A, Anderson AS, Clarke RB, et al. Risk determination and prevention of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 2014;16(5):446.
doi: 10.1186/s13058-014-0446-2
World Cancer Research Fund. 2017. https://www.wcrf.org/sites/default/files/Breast-Cancer-2017-Report.pdf . Accessed 22 Aug 2019.
Anderson AS, Mackison D, Boath C, et al. Promoting changes in diet and physical activity in breast and colorectal cancer screening settings: an unexplored opportunity for endorsing healthy behaviors. Cancer Prev Res. 2013;6:165–72.
doi: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-12-0385
World Cancer Research Fund/America Institute for Cancer Research. Driving action to prevent cancer and other non-communicable diseases. World Cancer Research Fund International. Nourishing Framework. 2018. https://www.wcrf.org/sites/default/files/driving-action.pdf . Accessed 22 Aug 2019.
Escoffery C, Lebow-Skelley E, Haardoerfer R, et al. A systematic review of adaptations of evidence-based public health interventions globally. Implement Sci. 2018;13(1):125.
doi: 10.1186/s13012-018-0815-9
Heerman WJ, JaKa MM, Berge JM, et al. The dose of behavioral interventions to prevent and treat childhood obesity: a systematic review and meta-regression. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2017;14:157.
doi: 10.1186/s12966-017-0615-7
National Institute for Health Research. 2017. https://www.nihr.ac.uk/documents/nihr-research-for-patient-benefit-rfpb-programme-guidance-on-applying-for-feasibility-studies/20474 . Accessed 22 Aug 2019.
Hoddinott P. A new era for intervention development studies. Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2015;1:36.
doi: 10.1186/s40814-015-0032-0
Blatch-Jones AJ, Pek W, Kirkpatrick E, Ashton-Key M. Role of feasibility and pilot studies in randomised controlled trials: a cross-sectional study. BMJ Open. 2018;8(9):e022233.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-022233
Levati S, Campbell P, Frost R, Dougall N, Wells M, Donaldson C, Hagen S. Optimisation of complex health interventions prior to a randomised controlled trial: a scoping review of strategies used. Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2016;2:17.
doi: 10.1186/s40814-016-0058-y
Scottish Government. Beating cancer: ambition and action. 2016. http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2016/03/9784 . Accessed 1 Aug 2019.
Knowler WC, Barrett-Connor E, Fowler SE, et al. Reduction in the incidence of type 2 diabetes with lifestyle intervention or metformin. N Engl J Med. 2002;346(6):393–403.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa012512
Anderson AS, Macleod M, Mutrie N, et al. Breast cancer risk reduction–is it feasible to initiate a randomised controlled trial of a screening programme? Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2014;11:156.
doi: 10.1186/s12966-014-0156-2
Conway E, Wyke S, Sugden J, et al. Can a lifestyle intervention be offered through NHS breast cancer screening? Challenges and opportunities identified in a qualitative study of women attending screening. BMC Public Health. 2016;16:758.
doi: 10.1186/s12889-016-3445-7
Abraham C, Michie S. A taxonomy of behaviour change techniques used in interventions. Health Psychol. 2008;27(3):379–87. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.27.3.379 .
doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.27.3.379
pubmed: 18624603
National Readership Survey Social Grade- definitions and Discriminatory power. http://www.nrs.co.uk/nrs-print/lifestyle-and-classification-data/social-grade/ . Accessed 30 Sept 2019.
Michie S, van Stralen MM, West R. The behaviour change wheel: a new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions. Implement Sci. 2011;6:42.
doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-6-42
Anderson AS, Craigie AM, Caswell S, et al. The impact of a body weight and physical activity weight loss intervention (BeWEL) initiated through a national colorectal cancer screening programme. BMJ. 2014;348:g1823.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.g1823
Anderson AS, Craigie AM, Gallant S, et al. Randomised controlled trial to assess the impact of a lifestyle intervention (ActWELL) in women invited to NHS breast screening. BMJ Open. 2018;8(11):e024136.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024136
World Health Organisation. 2018. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/noncommunicable-diseases . Accessed 22 Aug 2019.
Campbell NC, Murray E, Darbyshire J, et al. Designing and evaluating complex interventions to improve health care. BMJ. 2007;334(7591):455–9.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.39108.379965.BE
O’Cathain A, Croot L, Sworn K, et al. Taxonomy of approaches to developing interventions to improve health: a systematic methods overview. Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2019;5:41.
doi: 10.1186/s40814-019-0425-6
French SD, Green SE, O’Connor DA, et al. Developing theory-informed behaviour change interventions to implement evidence into practice: a systematic approach using the theoretical domains framework. Implement Sci. 2012;7:38.
doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-7-38
Hawkins J, Madden K, Fletcher A, et al. Development of a framework for the co-production and prototyping of public health interventions. BMC Public Health. 2017;17(1):689.
doi: 10.1186/s12889-017-4695-8
Collins LM, Murphy SA, Nair VN, Strecher VJ. A strategy for optimizing and evaluating behavioural interventions. Ann Behav Med. 2005;30(1):65–73.
doi: 10.1207/s15324796abm3001_8
Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, et al. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2008;337:a1655.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.a1655
Scottish Government. Scottish health survey: main report. 2017. https://www.gov.scot/publications/scottish-health-survey-2017-volume-1-main-report/ (2017). Accessed 22 Aug 2019.
Michie S, Abraham C, Whittington C, McAteer J, Gupta S. Effective techniques in healthy eating and physical activity interventions: a meta-regression. Health Psychol. 2009;28:690–701.
doi: 10.1037/a0016136