Self-regulation interventions - what do we know and where should we go?

This special edition of Health Psychology Review provides a very impressive and welcome attempt to synthesise the evidence to date on the effectiveness of self-regulation strategies in understanding and predicting health behaviour change. In this brief commentary I reflect on three issues: (a) the importance of small treatment effects; (b) variability in how interventions are delivered; and (c) the importance of emotion in relation to self-regulation

‘If I donate my organs it’s a gift, if you take them it’s theft’ : a qualitative study of planned donor decisions under opt-out legislation

This study was funded by a PhD studentship from the University of Stirling awarded to JM.Peer reviewe

Investigating the Effects of Threatening Language, Message Framing, and Reactance in Opt-Out Organ Donation Campaigns

This study was funded by a PhD studentship awarded to Jordan Miller from the University of Stirling.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

A pilot telephone intervention to increase uptake of breast cancer screening in socially deprived areas in Scotland (TELBRECS):study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND Breast cancer accounts for almost 30% of all cancers and is the second leading cause of cancer deaths in women in Scotland. Screening is key to early detection. The Scottish Breast Screening Programme is a nationwide, free at point of delivery screening service, to which all women aged between 50 and 70 years are invited to attend every 3 years. Currently over three-quarters of invited women regularly attend screening. However, women from more deprived areas are much less likely to attend: for example in the 3 years from 2010-2012 only 63% of women in the most deprived area attended the East of Scotland Breast Screening programme versus 81% in the least deprived. Research has suggested that reminders (telephone or letter) and brief, personalised interventions addressing barriers to attendance may be helpful in increasing uptake in low-income women. METHODS/DESIGN We will employ a brief telephone reminder and support intervention, whose purpose is to elicit and address any mistaken beliefs women have about breast screening, with the aim that the perceived benefits of screening come to outweigh any perceived barriers for individuals. We will test whether this intervention, plus a simple anticipated regret manipulation, will lead to an increase in the uptake of breast cancer screening amongst low-income women who have failed to attend a first appointment, in a randomised controlled trial with 600 women. Participants will be randomly allocated to one of four treatment arms i.e. 1) Letter reminder (i.e. Treatment as usual: CONTROL); 2) Telephone reminder (TEL), 3) Telephone reminder plus telephone support (TEL-SUPP) and 4) Telephone reminder plus support plus AR (TEL-SUPP-AR). The primary outcome will be attendance at breast screening within 3 months of the reminder letter. DISCUSSION If this simple telephone support intervention (with or without AR intervention) leads to a significant increase in breast screening attendance, this would represent a rare example of a theoretically-driven, relatively simple psychological intervention that could result in earlier detection of breast cancer amongst an under-served group of lower socio-economic women. TRIAL REGISTRATION Current Controlled trials: ISRCTN06039270. Registered 16th January 2014

Investigating midwives' barriers and facilitators to multiple health promotion practice behaviours: a qualitative study using the theoretical domains framework

Background In addition to their more traditional clinical role, midwives are expected to perform various health promotion practice behaviours (HePPBes) such as informing pregnant women about the benefits of physical activity during pregnancy and asking women about their alcohol consumption. There is evidence to suggest several barriers exist to performing HePPBes. The aim of the study was to investigate the barriers and facilitators midwives perceive to undertaking HePPBes. Methods The research compromised of two studies. Study 1: midwives based in a community setting (N = 11) took part in semi-structured interviews underpinned by the theoretical domains framework (TDF). Interviews were analysed using a direct content analysis approach to identify important barriers or facilitators to undertaking HePPBes. Study 2: midwives (N = 505) completed an online questionnaire assessing views on their HePPBes including free text responses (n = 61) which were coded into TDF domains. Study 2 confirmed and supplemented the barriers and facilitators identified in study 1. Results Midwives’ perceived a multitude of barriers and facilitators to carrying out HePPBes. Key barriers were requirements to perform an increasing amount of HePPBes on top of existing clinical work load, midwives’ cognitive resources, the quality of relationships with pregnant women, a lack of continuity of care and difficulty accessing appropriate training. Key facilitators included midwives’ motivation to support pregnant women to address their health. Study 1 highlighted strategies that midwives use to overcome the barriers they face in carrying out their HePPBes. Conclusions Despite high levels of motivation to carry out their health promotion practice, midwives perceive numerous barriers to carrying out these tasks in a timely and effective manner. Interventions that support midwives by addressing key barriers and facilitators to help pregnant women address their health behaviours are urgently needed

Colorectal Cancer Screening and Perceived Disgust:The Importance of the Ick Factor in Faecal Occult Blood Test Uptake

Background: Colorectal cancer is a major cause of cancer deaths worldwide. Screening is key to early detection but uptake of national programmes is poor, especially amongst those from lower socio-economic backgrounds. Decisions not to take up screening may be based more on emotional rather than rational evaluations. We aimed to examine the importance of perceived disgust (the ‘ICK’ factor) in determining colorectal cancer screening uptake, in a large, randomised controlled trial. Methods: This paper reports secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial of a simple, questionnaire-based Anticipated Regret (AR) intervention, which was delivered alongside existing pre-notification letters. 60,000 adults aged 50- 74 who were participant in the Scottish National Screening programme were randomised to one of 3 treatment arms: 1) no questionnaire (control), 2) Health Locus of Control (HLOC) questionnaire or 3) AR questionnaire. Primary outcome was Faecal Occult Blood Test kit return (FOBT uptake). 13,645 people completed questionnaires of secondary outcomes including intention to return test kit and a new self-report measure of perceived disgust (ICK-C). Results: Intentions, ICK and AR were all predictors of FOBT uptake; however, for people who expressed strong intentions to return their FOBT kit, only ICK differentiated kit returners from non-returners, with non-returners reporting higher disgust (mean difference=0.51; 95% CI for difference (0.37, 0.64), Cohen’s d=0.34). The 4-item ICK-C showed excellent internal reliability and predictive validity with regard to an objective measure i.e., FOBT uptake. Conclusions: The findings show that perceived disgust is an important emotional psychological construct in determining uptake of colorectal cancer screening. We also demonstrated that a simple 4-item scale (the ‘ICK-C), developed to be used in research on colorectal cancer screening, has excellent psychometric properties

Circumventing the "Ick" factor: A randomized trial of the effects of omitting affective attitudes questions to increase intention to become an organ donor

Objectives: Including or excluding certain questions about organ donation may influence peoples’ intention to donate. We investigated the effect of omitting certain affective attitudinal items on potential donors’ intention and behavior for donation.  Design: A cross-sectional survey with a subgroup nested randomized trial.  Methods: A total of 578 members of the public in four shopping centers were surveyed on their attitudes to organ donation. Non-donors (n= 349) were randomly assigned to one of three groups: Group 1 completed items on affective and cognitive attitudes, anticipated regret, intention, subjective norm and perceived behavioral control. Group 2 completed all items above but excluded affective attitudes. Group 3 completed all items but omitted negatively worded affective attitudes. The primary outcome was intention to donate, taking a donor card after the interview was a secondary behavioral outcome, and both were predicted using linear and logistic regression with group 1 as the reference.  Results: Mean (SD) 1–7 intention scores for groups 1, 2 and 3 were, respectively: 4.43 (SD 1.89), 4.95 (SD 1.64) and 4.88 (SD 1.81), with group 2 significantly higher than group 1 (β = 0.518, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.18 to 0.86).At the end of the interview, people in group 2 (66.7%; OR = 1.40, 95% CI 0.94 to 2.07,p= 0.096) but not those in group 3 (61.7%; OR = 1.10, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.75,p= 0.685), were marginally more likely to accept a donor card from the interviewer than people in group 1 (59.7%).  Conclusion: Omitting affective attitudinal items results in higher intention to donate organs and marginally higher rates of acceptance of donor cards, which has important implications for future organ donation public health campaigns

The impact of hypothetical PErsonalised Risk Information on informed choice and intention to undergo Colorectal Cancer screening colonoscopy in Scotland (PERICCS)—a randomised controlled trial

Background There is currently no existing evidence on the effects of personalised risk information on uptake of colonoscopy following first line screening for colorectal cancer. This study aimed to measure the impact of providing risk information based on faecal haemoglobin concentration to allow a fully informed choice around whether or not to undergo colonoscopy. Methods Two thousand seven hundred sixty-seven participants from the Scottish Bowel Screening Programme (SBoSP) database, who had not recently been invited for screening, were randomised to receive one of three types of hypothetical risk information materials: (1) numerical risk information (risk categories of one in 40, one in 1600 and one in 3500), (2) categorical risk information (highest, moderate and lowest risk), or (3) positive screening result letter (control group). The primary outcome was the impact of the risk materials on intention to undergo colonoscopy, to allow comparison with the current colonoscopy uptake of 77% for those with a positive screening result in the SBoSP. Secondary outcomes were knowledge, attitudes and emotional responses to the materials. Results Four hundred thirty-four (15.7%) agreed to participate with 100 from the numerical risk group (69.0%), 104 from the categorical risk group (72.2%) and 104 from the control group (71.7%) returning completed materials. Intention to undergo colonoscopy was highest in the highest risk groups for the numerical and categorical study arms (96.8% and 95.3%, respectively), but even in the lowest risk groups was > 50% (58.1% and 60.7%, respectively). Adequate knowledge of colorectal screening and the risks and benefits of colonoscopy was found in ≥ 98% of participants in all three arms. All participants reported that they found the information easy-to-understand. 19.1%, 24.0% and 29.6% of those in the numerical, categorical and control group, respectively, reported that they found the information distressing (p > 0.05). Conclusions Applying the risk categories to existing SBoSP data shows that if all participants were offered an informed choice to have colonoscopy, over two thirds of participants would intend to have the test. Equating to an increase in the number of screening colonoscopies from approx. 14,000 to 400,000 per annum, this would place an unmanageable demand on colonoscopy services, with a very small proportion of cancers and pre-cancers detected. However, the response to the materials were very positive, suggesting that providing risk information to those in lowest and moderate risk groups along with advice that colonoscopy is not currently recommended may be an option. Future research would be required to examine actual uptake

Theory Content, Question-Behavior Effects, or Form of Delivery Effects for Intention to Become an Organ Donor? Two Randomized Trials

Eliciting different attitudes with survey questionnaires may impact on intention to donate organs. Previous research used varying numbers of questionnaire items, or different modes of intervention delivery, when comparing groups. We aimed to determine whether intention to donate organs differed among groups exposed to different theoretical content, but similar questionnaire length, in different countries. We tested the effect of excluding affective attitudinal items on intention to donate, using constant item numbers in two modes of intervention delivery. Study 1: A multi-country, interviewer-led, cross-sectional randomized trial recruited 1007 participants, who completed questionnaires as per group assignment: including all affective attitude items, affective attitude items replaced, negatively-worded affective attitude items replaced. Study 2 recruited a UK-representative, cross-sectional sample of 616 participants using an online methodology, randomly assigned to the same conditions. Multilevel models assessed effects of group membership on outcomes: intention to donate (primary), taking a donor card, following a web-link (secondary). In study 1, intention to donate did not differ among groups. Study 2 found a small, significantly higher intention to donate in the negatively-worded affective attitudes replaced group. Combining data yielded no group differences. No differences were seen for secondary outcomes. Ancillary analyses suggest significant interviewer effects. Contrary to previous research, theoretical content may be less relevant than number or valence of questionnaire items, or form of intervention delivery, for increasing intention to donate organs