Randomised controlled trial to assess the impact of a lifestyle intervention (ActWELL) in women invited to NHS breast screening.

INTRODUCTION: In Scotland, the incidence of breast cancer is predicted to rise significantly in the next few decades and while there are measures to support reductions in morbidity and mortality, the breast cancer community is currently exploring preventative opportunities including supporting weight management programmes in postmenopausal women. This study aims to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a theory-based, community delivered, minimal contact, weight management (diet, physical activity and behaviour change techniques) programme (ActWELL) in women with a body mass index (BMI) >25 kg/m2 attending routine breast cancer screening appointments. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study will be a four-centre, 1:1 parallel group randomised controlled trial of a 12-month weight management intervention initiated in breast cancer screening centres, delivered by trained Breast Cancer Now lifestyle coaches in community settings. The intervention programme involves two intervention meetings with coaches plus (up to) nine telephone contacts over 12 months. The programme will focus on personalised diet (including alcoholic and sugary drinks) and physical activity habits. Behaviour change techniques include self-monitoring, goal setting, implementation intentions, action and coping plans. The study has a sample size of 414 women with a BMI >25 kg/m2 attending routine National Health Service breast cancer screening appointments. Measures will be taken at baseline, 12 weeks and at 12-month follow-up, complemented by qualitative interviews exploring perceived acceptability and impact on habitual behaviours. The two co-primary outcomes are mean change in measured body weight and change in physical activity between groups to 12 months. Secondary outcomes are changes in eating habits, alcohol intake, sedentary time, quality of life, waist circumference, lipid, haemoglobin A1c and insulin profiles, blood pressure and cost-effectiveness of the intervention. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol has been approved by East of Scotland Research Ethics Committee (17/ES/0073). All participants provide written informed consent. Dissemination will be through peer-reviewed publication and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN11057518; Pre-results.

Perceived barriers to leisure time physical activity in adults with type 2 diabetes attending primary healthcare in Oman: a cross-sectional survey.

OBJECTIVES: Physical activity is fundamental in diabetes management for good metabolic control. This study aimed to identify barriers to performing leisure time physical activity and explore differences based on gender, age, marital status, employment, education, income and perceived stages of change in physical activity in adults with type 2 diabetes in Oman. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study using an Arabic version of the 'Barriers to Being Active' 27-item questionnaire. SETTING: Seventeen primary health centres randomly selected in Muscat. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals>18 years with type 2 diabetes, attending diabetes clinic for >2 years and with no contraindications to performing physical activity. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Participants were asked to rate how far different factors influenced their physical activity under the following categories: fear of injury, lack of time, social support, energy, willpower, skills, resources, religion and environment. On a scale of 0-9, barriers were considered important if scored ≥5. RESULTS: A total of 305 questionnaires were collected. Most (96%) reported at least one barrier to performing leisure time physical activity. Lack of willpower (44.4%), lack of resources (30.5%) and lack of social support (29.2%) were the most frequently reported barriers. Using χ2 test, lack of willpower was significantly different in individuals with low versus high income (54.2%vs40%, P=0.002) and in those reporting inactive versus active stages of change for physical activity (50.7%vs34.7%, P=0.029), lack of resources was significantly different in those with low versus high income (40%vs24.3%, P=0.004) and married versus unmarried (33.8%vs18.5%, P=0.018). Lack of social support was significant in females versus males (35.4%vs20.8%, P=0.005). CONCLUSIONS: The findings can inform the design on physical activity intervention studies by testing the impact of strategies which incorporate ways to address reported barriers including approaches that enhance self-efficacy and social support.