Tweet
I paraphrased the title of the study, but I think its gets the gist. Hopefully being a member of ActiveMSers and getting my harassing e-mails has been helping. If not, please post your concerns below. - Dave
EFFICACY OF A BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTION FOR REDUCING SEDENTARY BEHAVIOR IN PEOPLE WITH MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS
Rachel E. Klaren, Elizabeth A. Hubbard, Robert W. Motl Kinesiology and Community Health, University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign, Urbana, IL
Background: Sitting time (ST), a measure of sedentary behavior, has been identified as a highly prevalent risk factor for morbidity in the general population and individuals with multiple sclerosis (MS), independent of physical activity (PA). To date, there is limited information on the efficacy of behavior interventions for reducing ST in people with MS. Behavioral interventions involve teaching people the skills, techniques, and strategies for behavior change, and have been effective for increasing PA in MS.
Objectives: This pilot, randomized controlled trial (RCT) examined the efficacy of a behavioral intervention for reducing ST in people with MS.
Methods: The sample consisted of 56 people with MS who were randomly assigned into behavioral intervention and wait-list control conditions. The behavioral intervention, based on social-cognitive theory, was delivered via the Internet and consisted of a dedicated website and one-on-one Skype video chats that taught participants the skills, techniques, and strategies for reducing sedentary behavior. The control condition involved a wait list, and the behavioral intervention was delivered among participants in this condition after study completion. ST was measured by questions on the abbrevi- ated International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) before and after the 6-month RCT. The data were analyzed using mixed-model analysis of variance (ANOVA) in SPSS 21.0.
Results: The mixed-model ANOVA indicated a statisti- cally significant condition by time interaction on ST (F1,54 = 6.24, P < .05, ηp² = .10). The behavioral intervention group had a statistically significant reduction in ST from pre-post intervention (P = .027), and the magnitude of the reduction was moderate (Cohen’s d = −0.46). The control group had a non–statistically significant increase in ST (P = .168) and the effect size was small (Cohen’s d = 0.26).
Conclusions: We provide the first data on the efficacy of a behavioral intervention for reducing ST in people with MS. This highlights the importance of designing and testing the effect of behavioral interventions that reduce ST on secondary outcomes such as function, symptoms, quality of life, and health status in people with MS.
EFFICACY OF A BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTION FOR REDUCING SEDENTARY BEHAVIOR IN PEOPLE WITH MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS
Rachel E. Klaren, Elizabeth A. Hubbard, Robert W. Motl Kinesiology and Community Health, University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign, Urbana, IL
Background: Sitting time (ST), a measure of sedentary behavior, has been identified as a highly prevalent risk factor for morbidity in the general population and individuals with multiple sclerosis (MS), independent of physical activity (PA). To date, there is limited information on the efficacy of behavior interventions for reducing ST in people with MS. Behavioral interventions involve teaching people the skills, techniques, and strategies for behavior change, and have been effective for increasing PA in MS.
Objectives: This pilot, randomized controlled trial (RCT) examined the efficacy of a behavioral intervention for reducing ST in people with MS.
Methods: The sample consisted of 56 people with MS who were randomly assigned into behavioral intervention and wait-list control conditions. The behavioral intervention, based on social-cognitive theory, was delivered via the Internet and consisted of a dedicated website and one-on-one Skype video chats that taught participants the skills, techniques, and strategies for reducing sedentary behavior. The control condition involved a wait list, and the behavioral intervention was delivered among participants in this condition after study completion. ST was measured by questions on the abbrevi- ated International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) before and after the 6-month RCT. The data were analyzed using mixed-model analysis of variance (ANOVA) in SPSS 21.0.
Results: The mixed-model ANOVA indicated a statisti- cally significant condition by time interaction on ST (F1,54 = 6.24, P < .05, ηp² = .10). The behavioral intervention group had a statistically significant reduction in ST from pre-post intervention (P = .027), and the magnitude of the reduction was moderate (Cohen’s d = −0.46). The control group had a non–statistically significant increase in ST (P = .168) and the effect size was small (Cohen’s d = 0.26).
Conclusions: We provide the first data on the efficacy of a behavioral intervention for reducing ST in people with MS. This highlights the importance of designing and testing the effect of behavioral interventions that reduce ST on secondary outcomes such as function, symptoms, quality of life, and health status in people with MS.