A narrative review of global and national physical activity and sedentary behaviour guidelines development processes - The GUidelines Standards (GUS) project.

BACKGROUND: Clinical and public health guidelines serve to direct clinical practice and policy, based on the best available evidence. The World Health Organization (WHO) and national health bodies of many countries have released physical activity and sedentary behaviour guidelines. Despite significant overlap in the body of evidence reviewed, the guidelines differ across jurisdictions. This study aimed to review the processes used to develop global and national physical activity and sedentary behaviour guidelines and examine the extent to which they conform with a recommended methodological standard for the development of guidelines. METHODS: We extracted data on nine sets of guidelines from seven jurisdictions (WHO, Australia, Canada, Japan, the Netherlands, United Kingdom, and United States). We rated each set of guidelines as high, medium, or low quality on criteria related to the rigour of the development process. RESULTS: We observed variation in the quality of guidelines development processes across jurisdictions and across different criteria. Guidelines received the strongest overall ratings for criteria on clearly describing the evidence selected and stating an explicit link between the recommendations and the supporting evidence. Guidelines received the weakest overall ratings for criteria related to clearly describing the methods used to formulate the recommendations and reporting external review by experts prior to publication. Evaluated against the selected criteria, the strongest processes were undertaken by the WHO and Canada. CONCLUSIONS: Reaching agreement on acceptable guideline development processes, as well as the inclusion and appraisal procedures of different types of evidence, would help to strengthen and align future guidelines.

A modified Delphi study to gain consensus for a taxonomy to report and classify physical activity referral schemes (PARS).

BACKGROUND: Physical Activity Referral Schemes (PARS), including exercise referral schemes, are a popular approach to health improvement, but understanding of effectiveness is limited by considerable heterogeneity in reporting and evaluation. We aimed to gain consensus for a PARS taxonomy as a comprehensive method for reporting and recording of such schemes. METHODS: We invited 62 experts from PARS policy, research and practice to complete a modified Delphi study. In round one, participants rated the need for a PARS taxonomy, the suitability of three proposed classification levels and commented on proposed elements. In round two, participants rated proposed taxonomy elements on an 11-point Likert scale. Elements scoring a median of ≥7, indicating high agreement, were included in the final taxonomy. RESULTS: Of those invited, 47 (75.8%) participated in round one, with high retention in round two (n = 43; 91.5%). 42 were UK-based, meaning the resultant taxonomy has been scrutinised for fit to the UK context only. The study gained consensus for a three-level taxonomy: Level 1: PARS classification (primary classification, provider, setting, conditions accepted [have or at risk of], activity type and funding). Level 2: scheme characteristics (staff structure, staff qualifications, behaviour change theories, behaviour change techniques, referral source, referrers, referral process, scheme duration, session frequency, session length, session times, session type, exit routes, action in case of non-attendance, baseline assessment, exit assessment, feedback to referrer and exclusion criteria) and Level 3: participant measures (demographics, monitoring and evaluation, and measures of change). CONCLUSION: Using a modified Delphi method, this study developed UK-based consensus on a PARS classification taxonomy. We encourage PARS practitioners and public health colleagues, especially those working with similar service models internationally, to test, refine and use this taxonomy to inform policy and practice.

Understanding for whom, under what conditions, and how an integrated approach to atrial fibrillation service delivery works: a realist review.

AIMS: To understand for whom, under what conditions, and how an integrated approach to atrial fibrillation (AF) service delivery works (or does not work). METHODS AND RESULTS: A realist review of integrated approaches to AF service delivery for adult populations aged ≥18 years. An expert panel developed an initial programme theory, searched and screened literature from four databases until October 2022, extracted and synthesized data using realist techniques to create context-mechanism-outcome configurations for integrated approaches to AF service, and developed an integrated approach refined programme theory. A total of 5433 documents were screened and 39 included. The refined programme theory included five context-mechanism-outcome configurations for how clinical and system-wide outcomes are affected by the way integrated approaches to AF service delivery are designed and delivered. This review identifies core mechanisms underpinning the already known fundamental components of integrated care. This includes having a central coordinator responsible for service organization to provide continuity of care across primary and secondary care ensuring services are patient centred. Additionally, a fifth pillar, lifestyle and risk factor reduction, should be recognized within an AF care pathway. CONCLUSION: It is evident from our provisional theory that numerous factors need to interlink and interact over time to generate a successfully integrated model of care in AF. Stakeholders should embrace this complexity and acknowledge that the learnings from this review are integral to shaping future service delivery in the face of an aging population and increased prevalence of AF.

Justification, rationale and methodological approaches to realist reviews.

Realist reviews offer a method to understand why an intervention is successful or not. Many factors influence how complex healthcare interventions are delivered and this makes understanding what works difficult. Effectiveness depends on delivery context, and success in one setting does not guarantee the same result in alternate settings. How an intervention works (the underlying mechanisms) in a particular setting for one population group, may not work in the same way for a different group. A realist review provides an iterative theory-driven approach to help understand how and for whom and under what conditions an intervention works.

Exploring the patient experience of remote hypertension management in Scotland during COVID-19: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to understand how patients experienced hypertension management, with or without blood pressure (BP) telemonitoring, during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN, METHODS, PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: This qualitative study conducted between April and November 2022 consisted of 43 semistructured telephone interviews (23 men and 20 women) from 6 primary care practices in one area of Scotland. RESULTS: From the views of 25 participants with experience of using the Connect Me telemonitoring service and 18 participants without such experience, 5 themes were developed. These were: (1) navigating access to services. There were challenges to gaining timely and/or in-person access to services and a reluctance to attend clinical settings because participants were aware of their increased risk of contracting the COVID-19 virus. (2) Adapting National Health Service services. All six practices had adapted care provision in response to potential COVID-19 transmission; however, these adaptations disrupted routine management of in-person primary care hypertension, diabetes and/or asthma checks. (3) Telemonitoring feedback. Telemonitoring reduced the need to attend in-person primary care practices and supported access to remote healthcare monitoring and feedback. (4) Self-management. Many non-telemonitoring participants were motivated to use self-management strategies to track their BP using home monitoring equipment. Also, participants were empowered to self-manage lifestyle and hypertension medication. (5) Experience of having COVID-19. Some participants contracting the COVID-19 virus experienced an immediate increase in their BP while a few experienced ongoing increased BP readings. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted routine in-person care for patients with hypertension. Both telemonitoring and some non-telemonitoring patients were motivated to self-manage hypertension, including self-adjusting medication; however, only those with access to telemonitoring had increased access to hypertension monitoring and feedback. BP telemonitoring permitted routine care to continue for participants in this study and may offer a service useful in pandemic proofing hypertension healthcare in the future.

Atrial fibrillation self-management: a mobile telephone app scoping review and content analysis.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) affects over 1.4 million people in the UK, resulting in a five-fold increased stroke risk and a three to four times greater risk of severe, disabling stroke. Atrial fibrillation, a chronic disease, requires monitoring, medication, and lifestyle measures. A self-management approach supported by mobile health (mHealth) may empower AF self-care. To assess the need to develop new mHealth self-management interventions for those with AF this review aimed to identify commercially available AF self-management apps, analyse, and synthesize (i) characteristics, (ii) functions, (iii) privacy/security, (iv) incorporated behaviour change techniques (BCTs), and (v) quality and usability. We searched app stores for 'atrial fibrillation' and 'anticoagulation', and included apps focused on AF self-management in the review. We examined app functions, privacy statements against best practice recommendations, the inclusion of BCTs using the App Behaviour Change Scale, and app quality/usability using the Mobile App Rating Scale. From an initial search of 555 apps, five apps were included in the review. Common functions were educational content, medication trackers, and communication with healthcare professionals. Apps contained limited BCTs, lacked intuitive functions and were difficult to use. Privacy policies were difficult to read. App quality rated from poor to acceptable and no app had been evaluated in a clinical trial. The review reports a lack of commercially available AF self-management apps of sufficient standard for use in healthcare settings. This highlights the need for clinically validated mHealth interventions incorporating evidence-based BCTs to support AF self-management.

Green Health Partnerships in Scotland; Pathways for Social Prescribing and Physical Activity Referral.

Increased exposure to green space has many health benefits. Scottish Green Health Partnerships (GHPs) have established green health referral pathways to enable community-based interventions to contribute to primary prevention and the maintenance of health for those with established disease. This qualitative study included focus groups and semi-structured telephone interviews with a range of professionals involved in strategic planning for and the development and provision of green health interventions (n = 55). We explored views about establishing GHPs. GHPs worked well, and green health was a good strategic fit with public health priorities. Interventions required embedding into core planning for health, local authority, social care and the third sector to ensure integration into non-medical prescribing models. There were concerns about sustainability and speed of change required for integration due to limited funding. Referral pathways were in the early development stages and intervention provision varied. Participants recognised challenges in addressing equity, developing green health messaging, volunteering capacity and providing evidence of success. Green health interventions have potential to integrate successfully with social prescribing and physical activity referral. Participants recommended GHPs engage political and health champions, embed green health in strategic planning, target mental health, develop simple, positively framed messaging, provide volunteer support and implement robust routine data collection to allow future examination of success.