Advertisement

A web-based physical activity intervention benefits persons with low self-efficacy in COPD: results from a randomized controlled trial

  • Stephanie A. RobinsonEmail author
  • Stephanie L. Shimada
  • Karen S. Quigley
  • Marilyn L. Moy
Article

Abstract

Promoting physical activity (PA) is of top priority in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This study examines the influence of an internet-delivered intervention on the relationship between exercise self-efficacy and changes in PA, physical health, and exercise capacity in COPD. 112 U.S. Veterans with COPD were randomized to either a comparison (pedometer alone) or an intervention group (pedometer plus access to an internet-mediated PA intervention). There was a significant interaction between baseline exercise self-efficacy and randomization group on change in PA. In the comparison group, there was a significant relationship between higher baseline exercise self-efficacy and greater change in PA, whereas in the intervention group, improvements in PA were independent of level of baseline self-efficacy. Similar patterns were found with physical health and exercise capacity as outcomes. The use of an internet-mediated intervention significantly benefited persons with COPD who had low baseline self-efficacy to increase PA and physical health.

Clinical trial registration The randomized clinical trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01772082).

Keywords

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease COPD Self-efficacy Physical activity Randomized trial Technology 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank the Veterans who participated in this study. The views expressed in this article do not communicate an official position of the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Funding

This study was funded by the Department of Veterans Affairs, Rehabilitation Research and Development Service [Career Development Award 2, F6847W (Moy); CDA2 IK2RX002165 (Wan); Merit O1150-R (Moy)], and the Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Academic Affiliations Advanced Fellowship Program in Health Services Research, the Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research (CHOIR), Edith Nourse Rogers Memorial Veterans Hospital (Robinson).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Stephanie A. Robinson, Stephanie L. Shimada, Karen S. Quigley, and Marilyn L. Moy declare they have no conflict of interest.

Human and animal rights and Informed consent

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Informed consent was obtained from all patients for being included in the study.

References

  1. American Thoracic Society. (2002). ATS statement: Guidelines for the six-minute walk test. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, 166, 111–117.  https://doi.org/10.1164/ajrccm.166.1.at1102 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bandura, A. (1986). The explanatory and predictive scope of self-efficacy theory. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 4, 359–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bandura, A. (2004). Health promotion by social cognitive means. Health Education & Behavior, 31, 143–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cindy Ng, L. W., Mackney, J., Jenkins, S., & Hill, K. (2012). Does exercise training change physical activity in people with COPD? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Chronic Respiratory Disease, 9, 17–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Danilack, V. A., Weston, N. A., Richardson, C. R., Mori, D. L., & Moy, M. L. (2014). Reasons persons with COPD do not walk and relationship with daily step count. COPD, 11, 290–299.  https://doi.org/10.3109/15412555.2013.841670 Google Scholar
  6. Davis, A. H., Figueredo, A. J., Fahy, B. F., & Rawiworrakul, T. (2007). Reliability and validity of the Exercise Self-Regulatory Efficacy Scale for individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Heart & Lung: The Journal of Acute and Critical Care, 36, 205–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gwaltney, C. J., Metrik, J., Kahler, C. W., & Shiffman, S. (2009). Self-efficacy and smoking cessation: A meta-analysis. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors: Journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors, 23, 56–66.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013529 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kazis, L. E., Miller, D. R., Clark, J. A., Skinner, K. M., Lee, A., Ren, X. S., et al. (2004). Improving the response choices on the veterans SF-36 health survey role functioning scales: Results from the Veterans Health Study. The Journal of Ambulatory Care Management, 27, 263–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Lewis, B. A., Napolitano, M. A., Buman, M. P., Williams, D. M., & Nigg, C. R. (2017). Future directions in physical activity intervention research: Expanding our focus to sedentary behaviors, technology, and dissemination. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 40, 112–126.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10865-016-9797-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Luszczynska, A., Schwarzer, R., Lippke, S., & Mazurkiewicz, M. (2011). Self-efficacy as a moderator of the planning–behaviour relationship in interventions designed to promote physical activity. Psychology and Health, 26, 151–166.  https://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2011.531571 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. McAuley, E., & Blissmer, B. (2000). Self-efficacy determinants and consequences of physical activity. Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews, 28, 85–88.Google Scholar
  12. McAuley, E., Szabo, A., Gothe, N., & Olson, E. A. (2011). Self-efficacy: Implications for physical activity, function, and functional limitations in older adults. American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, 5, 361–369.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1559827610392704 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Miller, M. R., Hankinson, J., Brusasco, V., Burgos, F., Casaburi, R., Coates, A., et al. (2005). Standardisation of spirometry. European Respiratory Journal, 26, 319–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Moy, M. L., Collins, R. J., Martinez, C. H., Kadri, R., Roman, P., Holleman, R. G., et al. (2015). An internet-mediated pedometer-based program improves health-related quality-of-life domains and daily step counts in COPD: A randomized controlled trial. Chest, 148, 128–137.  https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.14-1466 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Moy, M. L., Gould, M. K., Liu, I. A., Lee, J. S., & Nguyen, H. Q. (2016). Physical activity assessed in routine care predicts mortality after a COPD hospitalisation. ERJ Open Research, 2, 00062.  https://doi.org/10.1183/23120541.00062-2015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Moy, M. L., Teylan, M., Weston, N. A., Gagnon, D. R., & Garshick, E. (2013). Daily step count predicts acute exacerbations in a US cohort with COPD. PLoS ONE, 8, e60400.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060400 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Murray, T. C., Rodgers, W. M., & Fraser, S. N. (2012). Exploring the relationship between socioeconomic status, control beliefs and exercise behavior: A multiple mediator model. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 35, 63–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Nakahara, R., Yoshiuchi, K., Kumano, H., Hara, Y., Suematsu, H., & Kuboki, T. (2006). Prospective study on influence of psychosocial factors on glycemic control in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes. Psychosomatics, 47, 240–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nguyen, H. Q., Chu, L., Amy Liu, I. L., Lee, J. S., Suh, D., Korotzer, B., et al. (2014). Associations between physical activity and 30-day readmission risk in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Annals of the American Thoracic Society, 11, 695–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Robinson, S. A., Bisson, A. N., Hughes, M. L., Ebert, J., & Lachman, M. E. (2018). Time for change: Using implementation intentions to promote physical activity in a randomised pilot trial. Psychology and Health, 34, 232–254.  https://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2018.1539487 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Vogelmeier, C. F., Criner, G. J., Martinez, F. J., Anzueto, A., Barnes, P. J., Bourbeau, J., et al. (2017). Global strategy for the diagnosis, management, and prevention of chronic obstructive lung disease 2017 report. GOLD Executive Summary. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, 195, 557–582.  https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201701-0218pp CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Wan, E. S., Kantorowski, A., Homsy, D., Teylan, M., Kadri, R., Richardson, C. R., et al. (2017). Promoting physical activity in COPD: Insights from a randomized trial of a web-based intervention and pedometer use. Respiratory Medicine, 130, 102–110.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmed.2017.07.057 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ware, J. E., Jr., & Sherbourne, C. D. (1992). The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36): I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Medical Care, 30, 473–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Watz, H., Pitta, F., Rochester, C. L., Garcia-Aymerich, J., ZuWallack, R., Troosters, T., et al. (2014). An official European Respiratory Society statement on physical activity in COPD. European Respiratory Journal, 44, 1521–1537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Edith Nourse Rogers Memorial Veterans HospitalBedfordUSA
  2. 2.School of Public HealthBoston UniversityBostonUSA
  3. 3.Northeastern UniversityBostonUSA
  4. 4.VA Boston Healthcare SystemBostonUSA
  5. 5.Harvard Medical SchoolBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations