Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.
The effects of a lifestyle intervention on leisure-time sedentary behaviors in adults at risk: the Hoorn Prevention Study, a randomized controlled trial [with consumer summary] |
Lakerveld J, Bot SDM, van der Ploeg HP, Nijpels G |
Preventive Medicine 2013 Oct;57(4):351-356 |
clinical trial |
8/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: Yes; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: Yes; Adequate follow-up: Yes; Intention-to-treat analysis: Yes; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed* |
OBJECTIVE: This study set out to assess the short- and long-term effects of a primary care-based lifestyle intervention on different domains of leisure-time sedentary behaviors in Dutch adults at risk of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular diseases. METHODS: Between 2007 and 2009, adults (n = 622) at risk were randomly assigned to a counseling intervention aimed at adopting healthy lifestyle behaviors, or a control group that only received health brochures. Follow-up measures were done after 6, 12 and 24months. Linear regression analysis was used to examine between-group differences in self-report minutes per day sedentary behaviors, adjusted for baseline values. Stratified analyses were performed for sex and educational attainment. RESULTS: Seventy-nine percent (n = 490) of participants completed the last follow-up. Mean baseline sedentary behaviors were 254.6min per day (SD 136.2). Intention-to-treat analyses showed no significant differences in overall or domain-specific sedentary behaviors between the two groups at follow-up. Stratified analyses for educational attainment revealed a small and temporary between-group difference in favor of the intervention group, in those who finished secondary school. CONCLUSIONS: A primary care-based general lifestyle intervention was not more effective in reducing leisure-time sedentary behaviors than providing brochures in adults at risk for chronic diseases.
|