Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Peer-Led Self-Management Programs for Increasing Physical Activity
- 637 Downloads
Approximately 85 % of Canadians are not physically active enough to achieve health benefits. Peer-led self-management programs are becoming an increasingly popular strategy for modifying health behaviors, including physical activity. The purpose of this study was to systematically review and meta-analyze the effect of peer-led self-management interventions on physical activity.
PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews databases were systematically searched to identify all relevant randomized controlled trials that evaluated the effect of peer-led self-management on physical activity. The studies were described and effect size data were included in meta-analyses. Subgroup analyses were performed according to type of physical activity outcome (i.e., duration, frequency, other).
Twenty-one studies were included in the review and 14 reported statistically significant improvements in physical activity. A meta-analysis of 17 studies showed a statistically significant moderate pooled effect (standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.4, p < 0.001) of peer-led self-management programs on physical activity immediately post-intervention. The intervention had a large statistically significant effect based on the four studies that included follow-up measures (SMD = 1.5, p = 0.03). Meta-analysis of nine studies that used similar outcomes (i.e., minutes of physical activity) revealed a statistically significant small effect (SMD = 0.2, p < 0.001).
Peer-led self-management programs appear to be effective at increasing weekly duration of physical activity in various populations, but the effect size is small. Training peers to encourage increased physical activity may provide an effective method for reaching various clinical and non-clinical populations. More research is needed using validated and consistent physical activity outcomes.
KeywordsMeta-analysis Physical activity Peer group Self-efficacy Self-management programs
The authors would like to thank Jason Tong for his assistance with the systematic review. We would also like to thank the Rehab Research Lab productivity club for research and clinical input when editing the manuscript.
• Indicates article was included in systematic review
- 1.World Health Organization. World report on disability. Geneva, Switzerland, 2011. Available online: www.who.int/disabilities/world_report/2011/report/en/. [Accessed 14 April 2015].Google Scholar
- 7.Public Health Agency of Canada, The Strengthened Pan-Canadian Healthy Living Strategy 2010. Available online: http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/hp-ps/hl-mvs/ipchls-spimmvs/ld2-eng.phpGoogle Scholar
- 8.Colley RC, Garriguet D, Janssen I, Craig CL, Clarke J, Tremblay MS. Physical activity of Canadian adults: accelerometer results from the 2007 to 2009 Canadian Health Measures Survey. Stat Can. 2011. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/82-003-x/2011001/article/11396-eng.htm. [Accessed 14 April 2015].Google Scholar
- 11.Lorig KR. Stanford self-management programs effectiveness and translation. Institute of Medicine, 2004.Google Scholar
- 12.Bandura A. Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company; 1997.Google Scholar
- 13.Medvene L. Self-help groups, peer helping, and social comparison. In: Shirlynn Spacapan SO, editor. Helping and being helped: naturalistic studies. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1992. p. 49–77.Google Scholar
- 14.Bratter B, Freeman E. The maturing of peer counseling. Generations. 1990;14:49.Google Scholar
- 21.Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JPA, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ. 2009;339:b2700. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b2700.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 22.Best KL. Manual wheelchair use: understanding participation and skill development [PhD dissertation]. Vancouver: University of British Columbia; 2015. Available at https://open.library.ubc.ca/cIRcle/collections/ubctheses/24/items/1.0166098Google Scholar
- 24.Foley NC, Teasell RW, Bhogal SK, Speechley MR. Stroke rehabilitation evidence-based review: methodology. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2003;10:1–7.Google Scholar
- 26.Cohen J. Statistical power for the behavioural sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1998.Google Scholar
- 46.•Williams AM, Bloomfield L, Milthorpe E, Aspinall D, Filocamo K, Wellsmore T, et al. Effectiveness of moving on: an Australian designed generic self-management program for people with a chronic illness. BMC Health Serv Res. 2013;11:13–90.Google Scholar