School of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Jun 29;20(1):593. doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-05420-1.
We aimed to identify, synthesise and evaluate randomised control trial evidence on the effects of healthcare professional training on the delivery quality of health behaviour change interventions and, subsequently, on patient health behaviours.
Systematic review with narrative synthesis of effects on delivery quality and meta-analysis of health behaviour outcomes. We searched: Medline, EMBASE, PsychInfo, AMED, CINAHL Plus and the Cochrane Central Register of Control Trials up to March 2019. Studies were included if they were in English and included intervention delivery quality as an outcome. The systematic review was registered on PROSPERO (registration: CRD42019124502).
Twelve-studies were identified as suitable for inclusion. All studies were judged as being high risk of bias with respect to training quality outcomes. However with respect to behavioural outcomes, only two of the six studies included in the meta-analysis had a high risk and four had some concerns. Educational elements (e.g. presentations) were used in all studies and nine included additional practical learning tasks. In eight studies reporting delivery quality, 54% of healthcare professional communication outcomes and 55% of content delivery outcomes improved in the intervention arm compared to controls. Training that included both educational and practical elements tended to be more effective. Meta-analysis of patient health behavioural outcomes in six-studies found significant improvements (Standardised mean difference (SMD): 0.20, 95% confidence interval: 0.11 to 0.28, P < 0.0001, I = 0%). No significant difference was found between short (≤6-months) and long-term (> 6-months) outcomes (SMD: 0.25 vs 0.15; P = 0.31).
Delivery quality of health behaviour change interventions appears to improve following training and consequently to improve health behaviours. Future studies should develop more concise /integrated measures of delivery quality and develop optimal methods of training delivery.
本研究旨在识别、综合和评估有关医疗专业人员培训对健康行为改变干预措施实施质量的影响的随机对照试验证据,继而评估其对患者健康行为的影响。
对实施质量的影响进行系统综述和叙述性综合分析,并对健康行为结果进行荟萃分析。我们检索了:Medline、EMBASE、PsychInfo、AMED、CINAHL Plus 和 Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库,检索时间截至 2019 年 3 月。纳入的研究必须为英文,且将干预措施的实施质量作为结局指标。本系统综述已在 PROSPERO(注册号:CRD42019124502)上注册。
共确定了 12 项适合纳入的研究。所有研究在培训质量结局方面均被判断为存在高偏倚风险。但是,在行为结局方面,纳入荟萃分析的 6 项研究中仅有 2 项为高风险,4 项存在一些担忧。所有研究均使用了教育元素(如演示),9 项研究还包含了额外的实践学习任务。在 8 项报告实施质量的研究中,与对照组相比,干预组的 54%的医护人员沟通结局和 55%的内容传递结局得到了改善。包含教育和实践元素的培训往往更有效。纳入 6 项研究的患者健康行为结局荟萃分析发现,干预组的健康行为有显著改善(标准化均数差(SMD):0.20,95%置信区间:0.11 至 0.28,P<0.0001,I²=0%)。短期(≤6 个月)和长期(>6 个月)结局之间无显著差异(SMD:0.25 与 0.15;P=0.31)。
健康行为改变干预措施的实施质量似乎在培训后得到了改善,继而改善了健康行为。未来的研究应制定更简洁/综合的实施质量测量方法,并开发最佳的培训实施方法。