No abstract

Background: Interventions to change behaviour have substantial potential to impact positively on individual and overall public health. Despite an increasing focus on health behaviour change intervention research, interventions do not always have the desired effect on outcomes, while others have diluted effects once implemented into real-life settings. There is little investment into understanding how or why such interventions work or do not work. Methodological inadequacies of trials of behavioural interventions have been previously suggested as a barrier to the quality and advancement of behavioural research, with intervention fidelity acknowledged as a key area for improvement. However, there is much ambiguity regarding the terminology and conceptualisation of intervention fidelity and a lack of practical guidance regarding how to address it sufficiently, particularly within trials of complex behavioural interventions. Objectives: This article outlines specific issues concerning intervention fidelity within trials of health behaviour change interventions and suggests practical considerations and specific recommendations for researchers, with examples from the literature presented. Conclusions: Recommendations pertain to (1) clarifying how fidelity is defined and conceptualised, (2) considering fidelity beyond intervention delivery, (3) considering strategies to both enhance and assess fidelity, (4) making use of existing frameworks and guidance, (5) considering the quality and comprehensiveness of fidelity assessment strategies, (6) considering the balance between fidelity and adaptation and (7) reporting the use of fidelity enhancement and assessment strategies and their results. Suggestions for future research to improve our understanding of, and ability to, address fidelity in behaviour change interventions are also provided. ARTICLE HISTORY

Objectives Our aim was to conduct a systematic review to determine which technology-driven diabetes prevention interventions were effective in producing clinically significant weight loss, and to identify the behaviour change techniques and digital features frequently used in effective interventions. Methods We searched five databases (CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsychINFO, and Pubmed) from inception to September 2018 and reviewed 19 experimental and non-experimental studies of 21 technology-driven diet plus physical activity interventions for adults (≥18 years) at risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Behaviour change techniques were coded using the BCT taxonomy v1, and digital features were identified via thematic analysis of intervention descriptions. Results Sixty-three per cent of interventions were effective in the short term (achieving ≥3% weight loss at ≤6 months), using an average of 5.6 more behaviour change techniques than non-effective interventions, and 33% were effective in the long term (achieving ≥5% weight loss at ≥12 months), using 3.7 more behaviour change techniques than non-effective interventions. The techniques of social support (unspecified), goal setting (outcome/behaviour), feedback on behaviour, and self-monitoring of outcome(s) of behaviour were identified in over 90% of effective interventions. Interventions containing digital features that facilitated health and lifestyle education, behaviour/outcome tracking, and/or online health coaching were most effective. Conclusion The integration of specific behaviour change techniques and digital features may optimise digital diabetes prevention interventions to achieve clinically significant weight loss. Additional research is needed to identify the mechanisms in which behaviour change techniques and digital features directly influence physical activity, dietary behaviours, and intervention engagement.

Although interventions based on messaging and monitoring have the potential to improve medication adherence in patients with Type 2 diabetes, evidence of their efficacy is limited and additional high-quality, theory-based research is needed.

Parents predominantly understand and want to engage in healthy feeding processes. Consideration of infant feeding as a process that changes over time is necessary to support parents. Provision of clear, consistent information and guidance from trusted sources on when, what and how to feed is also essential.

AimsTo explore patients' perceptions and experiences of taking oral medications for the pharmacological management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (Type2DM). MethodsCinahl, EMBASE, Medline and PsycINFO databases were searched in 2014 to identify qualitative studies exploring patients' perceptions or experiences of taking medications for the management of Type2DM. Key concepts and themes were extracted and synthesised using meta-ethnography. ResultsEight studies were included. Primary study findings were synthesised to develop three higher order ConclusionsMedication taking for Type2DM is a unique adherence context, which requires the development of condition-specific interventions. Our findings indicate patients understand the need for medications but adjust dosage and timing in their daily lives. Our review suggests providers should acknowledge patient preferences in the development of management strategies and highlights an opportunity to direct the motivation evident in patients' experimentation towards potentially more beneficial medication taking behaviours.3

Goal-setting interventions appear to be associated with reduced HbA1C levels. However, the low numbers of studies identified and the risk biases across studies suggest more research is needed to further explore goal-setting BCTs in diabetes self-management.

Behaviour is central to the management of diabetes, both for people living with diabetes and for healthcare professionals delivering evidence‐based care. This review outlines the evolution of behavioural science and the application of theoretical models in diabetes care over the past 25 years. There has been a particular advancement in the development of tools and techniques to support researchers, healthcare professionals and policymakers in taking a theory‐based approach, and to enhance the development, reporting and replication of successful interventions. Systematic guidance, theoretical frameworks and lists of behavioural techniques provide the tools to specify target behaviours, identify why ideal behaviours are not implemented, systematically develop theory‐based interventions, describe intervention content using shared terminology, and evaluate their effects. Several examples from a range of diabetes‐related behaviours (clinic attendance, self‐monitoring of blood glucose, retinal screening, setting collaborative goals in diabetes) and populations (people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, healthcare professionals) illustrate the potential for these approaches to be widely translated into diabetes care. The behavioural science approaches outlined in this review give healthcare professionals, researchers and policymakers the tools to deliver care and design interventions with an evidence‐based understanding of behaviour. The challenge for the next 25 years is to refine the tools to increase their use and advocate for the role of theoretical models and behavioural science in the commissioning, funding and delivery of diabetes care.