Health Education Research, Vol. 14, No. 5, 653-666,
October 1999
© 1999 Oxford University Press
Comparison of stage-matched and unmatched interventions to promote exercise behaviour in the primary care setting
Exercise and Health Research Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 2LU,
1 Look After Your Heart–Avon, Health Promotion Service Avon, Bristol BS15 1LF and
2 Department of Social Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 2PR, UK
This study examined the effectiveness of stages of change-based counselling for exercise delivered by nurses in four primary care centres. Two-hundred and ninety-four subjects enrolled, recruited from patients attending 30-min health checks. The average age of participants was 42.4 years (SD = 15.1) and 77% were female. Participants completed a questionnaire assessing stage of exercise adoption, self-efficacy and exercise levels. Each centre was assigned to either one of three experimental conditions or to a control condition. Participants were counselled accordingly, receiving either stage-oriented exercise materials with counselling (stage plus counselling), stage-oriented materials without counselling (stage no counselling), non-staged materials with counselling (counselling only) or the current level of advice (control). Sixty-one percent (n = 180) returned follow-up questionnaires. When baseline differences in self-efficacy, age and gender were controlled for, there was no significant group or interaction effect for stage. There was a significant time effect (F = 3.55, P = 0.031). Post hoc analyses showed that significant differences were between baseline and 2 (t = –3.02, P = 0.003) and 6 months (t = –2.67, P = 0.009). No changes in self-efficacy and exercise levels were observed. Stage-based interventions were not superior to the other interventions. All single-contact interventions, while having no impact on exercise behaviour and self-efficacy, did enhance motivation to change.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  M. J. Findorff, H. Hatch Stock, C. R. Gross, and J. F. Wyman Does the Transtheoretical Model (TTM) Explain Exercise Behavior in a Community-Based Sample of Older Women? J Aging Health, December 1, 2007; 19(6): 985 - 1003. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 T. A. Smitherman, D. E. Kendzor, K. B. Grothe, and P. M. Dubbert State of the Art Review: Promoting Physical Activity in Primary Care Settings: A Review of Cognitive and Behavioral Strategies American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, October 1, 2007; 1(5): 397 - 409. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 L. Spencer, T. B. Adams, S. Malone, L. Roy, and E. Yost Applying the Transtheoretical Model to Exercise: A Systematic and Comprehensive Review of the Literature Health Promot Pract, October 1, 2006; 7(4): 428 - 443. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. De Vet, J. Brug, J. De Nooijer, A. Dijkstra, and N. K. De Vries Determinants of forward stage transitions: a Delphi study Health Educ. Res., April 1, 2005; 20(2): 195 - 205. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J Adams and M White Are activity promotion interventions based on the transtheoretical model effective? A critical review Br. J. Sports Med., April 1, 2003; 37(2): 106 - 114. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Whitelaw, S. Baldwin, R. Bunton, and D. Flynn The status of evidence and outcomes in Stages of Change research Health Educ. Res., December 1, 2000; 15(6): 707 - 718. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|