School of Nursing, Qingdao University, Qingdao, Shandong, China.
School of Nursing, Qingdao University, Qingdao, Shandong, China.
Int J Nurs Stud. 2023 Feb;138:104406. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2022.104406. Epub 2022 Nov 14.
Health coaching has emerged as a potential supporting tool for improving hypertension health behavior. However, health coaching efficacy on hypertension has not been reviewed systematically.
To evaluate the effects of health coaching on blood pressure and behavioral changes among patients with hypertension in randomized controlled trials.
A systematic review and meta-analysis.
We searched Medline (via PubMed), Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Proquest, and Scopus from inception to November 30, 2021. All randomized controlled trials that estimated the effects of health coaching on blood pressure and behavioral changes in adults with hypertension were included. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used to evaluate the quality of the included studies. Standardized mean differences (SMD) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects or fixed-effects meta-analysis. Sensitivity analysis and subgroup analysis were also conducted.
A total of 1655 studies were screened and 12 randomized controlled trials were selected for inclusion, with 2497 participants were included. Most of the studies were at low risk of bias and the quality of evidence was high. The meta-analysis demonstrated that health coaching could significantly reduce systolic blood pressure (SMD: -0.26, 95 % CI: -0.39, -0.13, p < 0.001) and diastolic blood pressure in hypertension (SMD: -0.13, 95 % CI: -0.22, -0.03, p = 0.009). In addition, health coaching showed statistically significant positive effects on dietary behaviors (SMD: 0.76, 95 % CI: 0.08, 1.44, p = 0.02) and self-efficacy (SMD: 0.39, 95 % CI: 0.05, 0.73, p = 0.02). Subgroup analysis indicated that the most common and effective type of health coaching was the phone-based interventions (systolic blood pressure: SMD: -0.27, 95 % CI: -0.44, -0.10, p = 0.002; diastolic blood pressure: SMD: -0.14, 95 % CI: -0.25, -0.03, p = 0.02). The effects of nurse-delivered interventions were larger than other health care professionals (systolic blood pressure: SMD: -0.42, 95 % CI: -0.68, -0.16, p = 0.002; diastolic blood pressure: SMD: -0.19, 95 % CI: -0.35, -0.04, p = 0.02).
Current evidence suggested that health coaching could reduce blood pressure, improve dietary behaviors, and increase self-efficacy among patients with hypertension and thus could be an effective and alternative method in the management of hypertension. The most common and effective types of health coaching were phone-based and nurse-delivered interventions. Thus, more strategies and policies may be needed to implement these types of interventions to more patients with hypertension.
健康教练已经成为改善高血压健康行为的一种潜在支持工具。然而,健康教练对高血压的疗效尚未得到系统评价。
评估健康教练对高血压患者血压和行为改变的影响。
系统评价和荟萃分析。
我们从开始到 2021 年 11 月 30 日在 Medline(通过 PubMed)、Web of Science、Embase、Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库、Proquest 和 Scopus 中搜索了所有估计健康教练对高血压成人血压和行为改变影响的随机对照试验。纳入了估计健康教练对高血压成人血压和行为改变影响的所有随机对照试验。使用 Cochrane 偏倚风险工具评估纳入研究的质量。使用随机效应或固定效应荟萃分析计算标准化均数差(SMD)和 95%置信区间(CI)。还进行了敏感性分析和亚组分析。
共筛选出 1655 项研究,纳入了 12 项随机对照试验,共纳入了 2497 名参与者。大多数研究的偏倚风险较低,证据质量较高。荟萃分析表明,健康教练可显著降低高血压患者的收缩压(SMD:-0.26,95%CI:-0.39,-0.13,p<0.001)和舒张压(SMD:-0.13,95%CI:-0.22,-0.03,p=0.009)。此外,健康教练对饮食行为(SMD:0.76,95%CI:0.08,1.44,p=0.02)和自我效能(SMD:0.39,95%CI:0.05,0.73,p=0.02)有显著的正向影响。亚组分析表明,最常见和最有效的健康教练类型是基于电话的干预(收缩压:SMD:-0.27,95%CI:-0.44,-0.10,p=0.002;舒张压:SMD:-0.14,95%CI:-0.25,-0.03,p=0.02)。护士提供的干预措施的效果大于其他卫生保健专业人员(收缩压:SMD:-0.42,95%CI:-0.68,-0.16,p=0.002;舒张压:SMD:-0.19,95%CI:-0.35,-0.04,p=0.02)。
目前的证据表明,健康教练可以降低高血压患者的血压,改善饮食行为,提高自我效能,因此可能是高血压管理的一种有效替代方法。最常见和最有效的健康教练类型是基于电话的和护士提供的干预措施。因此,可能需要更多的策略和政策来实施这些类型的干预措施,以惠及更多的高血压患者。