4.7 Article

The efficacy of motivational counselling and SMS reminders on daily sitting time in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a randomised controlled trial

Journal

ANNALS OF THE RHEUMATIC DISEASES
Volume 76, Issue 9, Pages 1603-1606

Publisher

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2016-210953

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives The aim of this report is to investigate the efficacy of an individually tailored, theory-based behavioural intervention for reducing daily sitting time, pain and fatigue, as well as improving health-related quality of life, general self-efficacy, physical function and cardiometabolic biomarkers in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods In this randomised controlled trial 150 patients with RA were randomised to an intervention or a no-intervention control group. The intervention group received three individual motivational counselling sessions and short message service or text messages aimed at reduction of sedentary behaviour during the 16-week intervention period. Primary outcome was change in daily sitting time measured objectively by ActivPAL. Secondary outcomes included change in pain, fatigue, physical function, general self-efficacy, quality of life, blood pressure, blood lipids, haemoglobin A1c, body weight, body mass index, waist circumference and waist hip ratio. Results 75 patients were allocated to each group. Mean reduction in daily sitting time was -1.61 hours/day in the intervention versus 0.59 hours/day increase in the control group between-group difference -2.20 (95% CI -2.72 to -1.69; p<0.0001) hours/day in favour of the intervention group. Most of the secondary outcomes were also in favour of the intervention. Conclusion An individually tailored, behavioural intervention reduced daily sitting time in patients with RA and improved patient-reported outcomes and cholesterol levels.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available