BACKGROUND: Physical activity among those with type 2 diabetes (T2D) is independently associated with superior medical outcomes, but existing behavioral interventions have not led to widespread increases in activity in this population. A remotely delivered intervention that targets well-being constructs associated with greater activity and assists in the creation of specific physical activity goals has the potential to improve activity and outcomes in T2D. OBJECTIVE: To outline the rationale and methods of two studies designed to assess the impact and optimal duration of a combined positive psychology-motivational interviewing (PP-MI) intervention for inactive persons with T2D. METHODS: We conducted trials studying 8-week (BEHOLD-8;) and 16-week (BEHOLD-16;) phone-delivered interventions, compared to attention-matched control conditions. In a two-step randomization design, participants were allocated randomly first to study (BEHOLD-8 or BEHOLD-16), then to study condition within study. The primary aims in both trials were feasibility (rates of session completion) and acceptability (participant session ratings), with additional aims examining intervention effects on accelerometer-measured physical activity, psychological measures, and health-related metrics (e.g. vital signs). Main analyses, currently being conducted, will utilize mixed effects models between study conditions, and secondary analyses will utilize the same models to compare the 8- and 16-week PP-MI interventions on feasibility and impact. RESULTS: Enrollment and data collection have been completed for both trials (BEHOLD-8: N = 60; BEHOLD-16: N = 70), and data analysis is ongoing to assess feasibility and acceptability within study, as well as the relative feasibility and acceptability of the PP-MI interventions across the two studies. We will also explore impact on clinical outcomes between groups. CONCLUSIONS: This design will address how intervention content (i.e. PP elements vs. no PP elements) and intervention duration (8 weeks vs. 16 weeks) affect feasibility, acceptability, and impact, allowing intervention optimization before a next-step larger clinical trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03150199; NCT03001999.
BACKGROUND: Physical activity among those with type 2 diabetes (T2D) is independently associated with superior medical outcomes, but existing behavioral interventions have not led to widespread increases in activity in this population. A remotely delivered intervention that targets well-being constructs associated with greater activity and assists in the creation of specific physical activity goals has the potential to improve activity and outcomes in T2D. OBJECTIVE: To outline the rationale and methods of two studies designed to assess the impact and optimal duration of a combined positive psychology-motivational interviewing (PP-MI) intervention for inactive persons with T2D. METHODS: We conducted trials studying 8-week (BEHOLD-8;) and 16-week (BEHOLD-16;) phone-delivered interventions, compared to attention-matched control conditions. In a two-step randomization design, participants were allocated randomly first to study (BEHOLD-8 or BEHOLD-16), then to study condition within study. The primary aims in both trials were feasibility (rates of session completion) and acceptability (participant session ratings), with additional aims examining intervention effects on accelerometer-measured physical activity, psychological measures, and health-related metrics (e.g. vital signs). Main analyses, currently being conducted, will utilize mixed effects models between study conditions, and secondary analyses will utilize the same models to compare the 8- and 16-week PP-MI interventions on feasibility and impact. RESULTS: Enrollment and data collection have been completed for both trials (BEHOLD-8: N = 60; BEHOLD-16: N = 70), and data analysis is ongoing to assess feasibility and acceptability within study, as well as the relative feasibility and acceptability of the PP-MI interventions across the two studies. We will also explore impact on clinical outcomes between groups. CONCLUSIONS: This design will address how intervention content (i.e. PP elements vs. no PP elements) and intervention duration (8 weeks vs. 16 weeks) affect feasibility, acceptability, and impact, allowing intervention optimization before a next-step larger clinical trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03150199; NCT03001999.
Authors: Mariëlle E J B Goossens; Johan W S Vlaeyen; Alita Hidding; Ank Kole-Snijders; Silvia M A A Evers Journal: Clin J Pain Date: 2005 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 3.442
Authors: K Ismail; E Maissi; S Thomas; T Chalder; U Schmidt; J Bartlett; A Patel; C Dickens; F Creed; J Treasure Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Kristin L Schneider; Sherry L Pagoto; Barbara Handschin; Emily Panza; Susan Bakke; Qin Liu; Mihaela Blendea; Ira S Ockene; Yunsheng Ma Journal: Ment Health Phys Act Date: 2011-06-01
Authors: Deborah J Bowen; Matthew Kreuter; Bonnie Spring; Ludmila Cofta-Woerpel; Laura Linnan; Diane Weiner; Suzanne Bakken; Cecilia Patrick Kaplan; Linda Squiers; Cecilia Fabrizio; Maria Fernandez Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2009-05 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Jeff C Huffman; Lauren E Harnedy; Christina N Massey; Alba Carrillo; Emily H Feig; Wei-Jean Chung; Christopher M Celano Journal: Health Psychol Behav Med Date: 2022-03-10
Authors: Rachel A Millstein; Julia Golden; Brian C Healy; Hermioni L Amonoo; Lauren E Harnedy; Alba Carrillo; Christopher M Celano; Jeff C Huffman Journal: Health Psychol Behav Med Date: 2022-08-04