M Barker1,2, S D'Angelo3, G Ntani3, W Lawrence3,4, J Baird3,4, M Jarman5, C Vogel3,4, H Inskip3,4, C Cooper3,4,6, N C Harvey3,4. 1. MRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, Southampton General Hospital, University of Southampton, Southampton, SO16 6YD, UK. meb@mrc.soton.ac.uk. 2. NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK. meb@mrc.soton.ac.uk. 3. MRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, Southampton General Hospital, University of Southampton, Southampton, SO16 6YD, UK. 4. NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK. 5. Li Ka Shing Centre for Health Research Innovation, Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. 6. NIHR Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Unit, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, The Botnar Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Abstract
In a randomised controlled trial of vitamin D during pregnancy, we demonstrated that women with lower self-efficacy were more likely to experience practical problems with taking the trial medication and that this was associated with lower compliance and achieved 25(OH)-vitamin D concentrations. INTRODUCTION: The relationship between self-efficacy (the belief that one can carry out a behaviour), compliance with study protocol and outcome was explored within a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of vitamin D supplementation in pregnancy. METHODS: In the Maternal Vitamin D Osteoporosis Study (MAVIDOS) trial, women with circulating plasma 25(OH)-vitamin D of 25-100 nmol/l in early pregnancy were randomised to either 1000 IU cholecalciferol/day or matched placebo from 14 weeks until delivery. Circulating 25(OH)-vitamin D concentrations were assessed at 14 and 34 weeks' gestation. A sequential sub-sample completed Schwarzer's General Self-Efficacy Scale at 14 and 34 weeks and the Problematic Experiences of Therapy Scale at 34 weeks. Women were interviewed about their experiences of the trial and interview transcripts analysed thematically. RESULTS: In 203 women, those with higher self-efficacy were less likely to experience practical problems taking the study medication (odds ratio (OR) 0.81 (95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.69-0.95), p = 0.01). Over half reported practical problems associated with poorer compliance with the protocol requiring women to take the medication daily. Compliance in women who experienced practical problems was 94 % compared with 98 % for those with no problems (p < 0.001). Poorer compliance was also associated with lower concentrations of 25(OH)-D in late pregnancy in the treatment group (β = 0.54 nmol/l (95 % CI 0.18-0.89), p = 0.003). Thematic analysis suggested common difficulties were remembering to take the medication every day and swallowing the large capsules. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that differences in self-efficacy influence trial outcomes. Such information may help clinicians anticipate responses to routine vitamin D supplementation in pregnancy and identify those who may need more support to comply. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN82927713, registered 11/04/2008.
RCT Entities:
In a randomised controlled trial of vitamin D during pregnancy, we demonstrated that women with lower self-efficacy were more likely to experience practical problems with taking the trial medication and that this was associated with lower compliance and achieved 25(OH)-vitamin D concentrations. INTRODUCTION: The relationship between self-efficacy (the belief that one can carry out a behaviour), compliance with study protocol and outcome was explored within a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of vitamin D supplementation in pregnancy. METHODS: In the Maternal Vitamin DOsteoporosis Study (MAVIDOS) trial, women with circulating plasma 25(OH)-vitamin D of 25-100 nmol/l in early pregnancy were randomised to either 1000 IU cholecalciferol/day or matched placebo from 14 weeks until delivery. Circulating 25(OH)-vitamin D concentrations were assessed at 14 and 34 weeks' gestation. A sequential sub-sample completed Schwarzer's General Self-Efficacy Scale at 14 and 34 weeks and the Problematic Experiences of Therapy Scale at 34 weeks. Women were interviewed about their experiences of the trial and interview transcripts analysed thematically. RESULTS: In 203 women, those with higher self-efficacy were less likely to experience practical problems taking the study medication (odds ratio (OR) 0.81 (95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.69-0.95), p = 0.01). Over half reported practical problems associated with poorer compliance with the protocol requiring women to take the medication daily. Compliance in women who experienced practical problems was 94 % compared with 98 % for those with no problems (p < 0.001). Poorer compliance was also associated with lower concentrations of 25(OH)-D in late pregnancy in the treatment group (β = 0.54 nmol/l (95 % CI 0.18-0.89), p = 0.003). Thematic analysis suggested common difficulties were remembering to take the medication every day and swallowing the large capsules. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that differences in self-efficacy influence trial outcomes. Such information may help clinicians anticipate responses to routine vitamin D supplementation in pregnancy and identify those who may need more support to comply. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN82927713, registered 11/04/2008.
Entities:
Keywords:
Compliance; Pregnancy; Randomised controlled trial; Self-efficacy; Vitamin D
Authors: Andrew Prestwich; Ian Kellar; Richard Parker; Siobhan MacRae; Matthew Learmonth; Bianca Sykes; Natalie Taylor; Holly Castle Journal: Health Psychol Rev Date: 2013-07-15
Authors: P Mithra; B Unnikrishnan; T Rekha; K Nithin; K Mohan; V Kulkarni; V Kulkarni; D Agarwal Journal: Afr Health Sci Date: 2013-12 Impact factor: 0.927
Authors: Andrew Steptoe; Linda Perkins-Porras; Elisabeth Rink; Sean Hilton; Francesco P Cappuccio Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2004-11 Impact factor: 4.267
Authors: C Kerr; C Bottomley; S Shingler; L Giangregorio; H M de Freitas; C Patel; S Randall; D T Gold Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2017-03-06 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Rebecca J Moon; Elizabeth M Curtis; Stephen J Woolford; Shanze Ashai; Cyrus Cooper; Nicholas C Harvey Journal: Ther Adv Musculoskelet Dis Date: 2021-04-08 Impact factor: 5.346
Authors: Grażyna Iwanowicz-Palus; Marta Zarajczyk; Agnieszka Bień; Magdalena Korżyńska-Piętas; Justyna Krysa; Mansur Rahnama-Hezavah; Artur Wdowiak Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-12-28 Impact factor: 3.390