Predicting discretionary food consumption using temporal self-regulation theory and food reward sensitivity.

Discretionary foods account for over a third of the average adult's total daily energy intake. But its excess consumption is a risk factor for obesity, Type 2 diabetes, and other diet-related diseases. This study aimed to use temporal self-regulation theory (intention, past behaviour, habit, self-regulatory capacity) and food reward sensitivity to identify predictors of discretionary food consumption. Two hundred and seventy-three participants aged between 18 and 80 (M = 42.55, SD = 17.07) comprising of mostly females (79.5%) and those residing in Australia (93.4%), completed a two-part online survey, one week apart. Participants completed measures of intention, past behaviour, habit, self-regulatory capacity, food reward sensitivity and demographic information at time one, and discretionary food consumption at time two. Data was analysed using a hierarchical multiple regression analysis. All variables in combination accounted for a significant 40.3% of the variance in discretionary food consumption (R2 = 0.40, p < .001). However, past behaviour and intention were the only unique significant predictors of discretionary food consumption. No significant moderation effects found. Findings offer insight into the motivators of discretionary food consumption, which can inform the development of effective interventions to reduce discretionary food consumption. Past behaviour should be considered, and intention targeted in interventions to reduce discretionary food consumption.

Pharmacists' perceptions and delivery of health behaviour change recommendations: Mapping the COM-B model.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacists are trusted and accessible healthcare professionals who are well-positioned to deliver brief health behaviour change technique-based interventions for chronic health conditions. However, little is known about the factors influencing pharmacists' use of behaviour change techniques and their capacity to deliver these interventions within community pharmacy. OBJECTIVES: This study employed the COM-B model to explore the factors that explain pharmacists' delivery of behaviour change techniques in practice. A secondary objective was to ascertain whether capability, opportunity, and motivation are associated with and explain significant variance in the use of behaviour change techniques during patient interactions. METHODS: Two-hundred and eleven Australian pharmacists (mean age = 36.1, SD = 10.7) completed a survey on their capability, opportunity, and motivation to deliver behaviour change techniques, and their delivery and frequency of use in practice. RESULTS: Most pharmacists (91.3%) use behaviour change techniques during patient interactions. Results from a simple linear regression showed that a composite COM score was associated with pharmacists' behaviour change technique use F(1,195) = 47.12, ß = 0.44, 95 % CI [0.09, 0.16], p < .001, and their frequency of use (F(1,198) = 44.19, ß = 0.43, 95 % CI [0.02, 0.06], p < .001). While capability, opportunity, and motivation were individually associated with the range and frequency of behaviour change technique used, motivation was the only significant variable in the composite model for range (ß = 0.35, 95 % CI [0.11, 0.41], p < .001) and frequency of behaviour change technique use (ß = 0.22, 95 % CI [0.01, 0.09], p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacist motivation was the most important construct explaining behaviour change technique use. Interventions should seek to foster pharmacist motivation and may benefit from adopting COM-B as a behaviour change framework, to understand the factors influencing the delivery of behaviour change interventions.