...
首页> 外文期刊>Preventive Medicine: An International Journal Devoted to Practice and Theory >What do we know about brief interventions for physical activity that could be delivered in primary care consultations? A systematic review of reviews
【24h】

What do we know about brief interventions for physical activity that could be delivered in primary care consultations? A systematic review of reviews

机译:我们如何了解可以在初级保健咨询中交付的身体活动的简短干预措施? 系统审查评论

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

This systematic review of reviews aims to investigate how brief interventions (BIs) are defined, whether they increase physical activity, which factors influence their effectiveness, who they are effective for, and whether they are feasible and acceptable. We searched CINAHL, Cochrane database of systematic reviews, DARE, HTA database, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Science Citation Index-Expanded and Social Sciences Citation Index, and Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network from their inception until May 2015 to identify systematic reviews of the effectiveness of BIs aimed at promoting physical activity in adults, reporting a physical activity outcome and at least one BI that could be delivered in a primary care setting. A narrative synthesis was conducted. We identified three specific BI reviews and thirteen general reviews of physical activity interventions that met the inclusion criteria. The BI reviews reported varying definitions of BIs, only one of which specified a maximum duration of 30 min. BIs can increase self-reported physical activity in the short term, but there is insufficient evidence about their longterm-impact, their impact on objectively measured physical activity, and about the factors that influence their effectiveness, feasibility and acceptability. Current definitions include BIs that are too long for primary care consultations. Practitioners, commissioners and policy makers should be aware of this when interpreting evidence about BIs, and future research should develop and evaluate very brief interventions (of 5 min or less) that could be delivered in a primary care consultation. (C) 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc.
机译:这种对评论的系统审查旨在调查如何定义干预措施(BIS),无论是如何增加体育活动,这些因素都会影响其效率,以及它们是可行和可接受的。我们搜索了Cinahl,Cochrane数据库系统评论,敢于,HTA数据库,Embase,Medline,Psycinfo,科学引文扩展和社会科学引文扩展和社会科学指南,并从成立到2015年5月,苏格兰际联络指南网络,以确定有效性的系统审查BIS旨在促进成人体育活动,报告身体活动结果和至少一个可以在初级保健环境中交付的BI。进行叙事合成。我们确定了符合纳入标准的身体活动干预措施的三项特定BI审查和13项一般评论。 BI审查报告了BIS的不同定义,其中一个只有一个持续时间为30分钟。 BIS可以在短期内增加自我报告的身体活动,但有足够的证据表明它们的持续影响,它们对客观测量的身体活动的影响,以及影响其有效性,可行性和可接受性的因素。目前的定义包括初级保健咨询的BIS太长。在解释BIS的证据时,从业人员,专员和决策者应该了解这一点,未来的研究应制定和评估可以在初级保健咨询中提供的非常简短的干预措施(5分钟或更短)。 (c)2017作者。 elsevier公司发布

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号