International Journal of Epidemiology 2002;31:808-815
© International Epidemiological Association 2002
Cardiovascular Disease |
Advising people to take more exercise is ineffective: a randomized controlled trial of physical activity promotion in primary care
a Health Promotion Research Unit and
b Medical Statistics Unit, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT, UK.
d British Heart Foundation Health Promotion Research Group, Department of Public Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Abstract
Background Over the last 10 years ‘exercise referral schemes’ have been popular even though the evidence for effectiveness of any one-to-one intervention in primary care is deficient. We report the results of a primary care based one-to-one intervention that compared the effect of two communication styles with a no-intervention control group on self-reported physical activity at 12 months.
Methods In all, 1658 middle-aged men and women were randomly assigned to 30 minutes of brief negotiation or direct advice in primary care or a no-intervention control group. The main outcome was self-reported physical activity at 12 months. Secondary outcome measures included change in blood pressure and body mass index.
Results Intention-to-treat analysis revealed no significant differences in physical activity between groups. Brief negotiation group participants who completed the study increased their physical activity significantly more than controls. There was no change in body mass index in any group. The brief negotiation group produced a greater reduction in diastolic blood pressure than direct advice.
Conclusion If patients whose health may benefit from increased physical activity seek advice in primary care, 20–30 minutes of brief negotiation to increase physical activity is probably more effective than similar attempts to persuade or coerce. However, blanket physical activity promotion in primary care is not effective. The most effective way of increasing physical activity in primary care has yet to be determined.
Keywords Exercise, primary health care, intervention studies, physician-patient relations
Accepted 10 September 2001
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  L. von Huth Smith, S. Ladelund, K. Borch-Johnsen, and T. Jorgensen A randomized multifactorial intervention study for prevention of ischaemic heart disease (Inter99): The long-term effect on physical activity Scand J Public Health, June 1, 2008; 36(4): 380 - 388. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. M.F. van Sluijs, M. N.M. van Poppel, J. W.R. Twisk, M. J. Chin A Paw, K. J. Calfas, and W. van Mechelen Effect of a Tailored Physical Activity Intervention Delivered in General Practice Settings: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial Am J Public Health, October 1, 2005; 95(10): 1825 - 1831. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. M Wood, I. R White, M. Hillsdon, and J. Carpenter Comparison of imputation and modelling methods in the analysis of a physical activity trial with missing outcomes Int. J. Epidemiol., February 1, 2005; 34(1): 89 - 99. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P. A. Estabrooks, R. E. Glasgow, and D. A. Dzewaltowski Physical Activity Promotion Through Primary Care JAMA, June 11, 2003; 289(22): 2913 - 2916. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 W. R. Bruce Counterpoint: From Animal Models to Prevention of Colon Cancer. Criteria for Proceeding from Preclinical Studies and Choice of Models for Prevention Studies Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., May 1, 2003; 12(5): 401 - 404. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|