Article Figures & Data
Figures
- Figure 1.
Patients who received assessment of PA level, PAC, and self-monitoring tools from PHCPs during the past 18 mo: Percentages were calculated according to the number of patients seen by FPs (n = 439), nurses (n = 188), and dietitians (n = 12).
PA—physical activity, PAC—PA counseling, PHCP—primary health care provider.
Tables
- Table 1.
Patient characteristics and assessment of PA level and PAC provided by FPs, nurses, or dietitians during the past 18 mo: Variables in bold were included in the multivariate analysis as independent variables.
CHARACTERISTIC N VALUE PA LEVEL ASSESSMENT PAC OR (95% CI) P VALUE OR (95% CI) P VALUE Sociodemographic data • Female sex, % 439 66.1 0.90 (0.61 to 1.34) .60 1.08 (0.67 to 1.75) .76 • Median age (IQR), y 439 59.1 (49.3 to 67.2) 1.00 (0.98 to 1.01) .62 0.99 (0.98 to 1.01) .38 • Married or in a civil union, % 439 67.2 1.08 (0.72 to 1.60) .72 0.90 (0.55 to 1.45) .65 • Postsecondary education, % 437 32.3 1.08 (0.72 to 1.60) .72 0.74 (0.45 to 1.23) .25 • Family annual income ≥ $55 000, % 429 40.6 0.98 (0.67 to 1.45) .93 0.57 (0.35 to 0.93) .03 • Smoker, % 439 14.4 1.10 (0.64 to 1.88) .73 0.93 (0.48 to 1.80) .83 • Private health coverage, % 439 56.0 1.05 (0.72 to 1.53) .81 0.84 (0.53 to 1.32) .45 • Employed, % 439 42.1 1.30 (0.89 to 1.90) .18 1.39 (0.88 to 2.19) .16 Anthropometric data • Median BMI (IQR), kg/m2 439 28.7 (25.5 to 32.6) 0.99 (0.96 to 1.02) .40 1.08 (1.04 to 1.12) < .01 • Median waist circumference (IQR), cm 424 96.4 (85.3 to 106.0) 0.99 (0.98 to 1.01) .22 1.03 (1.01 to 1.04) < .01 • Overweight or obese (BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2), % 439 78.8 0.73 (0.46 to 1.16) .18 2.39 (1.22 to 4.70)* .01 Median no. of health provider encounters in past 18 mo (IQR) • Nurse 439 0 (0 to 2) 1.17 (1.07 to 1.29) < .001 1.26 (1.15 to 1.37) < .01 • FP 439 4 (2 to 6) 1.04 (0.97 to 1.11) .31 1.07 (0.99 to 1.16) .08 Comorbidities • Hypertension 439 35.5 1.27 (0.886 to 1.88) .23 1.79 (1.13 to 2.84) .01† • Dyslipidemia 439 34.4 0.87 (0.59 to 1.30) .49 1.53 (0.96 to 2.43) .08† • Hypothyroidism 439 16.4 0.75 (0.45 to 1.24) .26 0.77 (0.40 to 1.47) .42 • Sleep apnea 439 3.4 0.80 (0.29 to 2.23) .68 1.86 (0.62 to 5.57) .27 • Osteoporosis 439 6.6 1.34 (0.62 to 2.87) .46 0.74 (0.28 to 2.00) .55 • Anxiety or depression 439 17.8 1.51 (0.92 to 2.48) .11† 1.43 (0.82 to 2.51) .21 • Asthma or COPD 439 11.8 1.00 (0.56 to 1.78) .99 0.73 (0.34 to 1.56) .42 • Arthritis or arthrosis 439 25.3 1.18 (0.76 to 1.81) .46 1.23 (0.74 to 2.05) .43 • Heart and vascular disease 439 15.9 1.28 (0.77 to 2.15) .34 0.99 (0.53 to 1.48) .96 • Type 2 diabetes or prediabetes 439 20.5 1.51 (0.94 to 2.42) .09† 3.50 (2.11 to 5.81)‡ <.01† • Median no. of comorbidities (IQR) 439 2 (1 to 3) 1.08 (0.95 to 1.21) .24 1.23 (1.06 to 1.42) < .01 Median health-related quality of life scores (IQR) • Physical component summary 435 48.8 (41.7 to 55.9) 1.01 (1.00 to 1.03) .16 1.02 (1.00 to 1.04) .12 • Mental component summary 435 51.2 (42.3 to 56.6) 1.02 (1.00 to 1.04) .04 1.00 (0.97 to 1.02) .77 Physical fitness and activity • Median recreational PA index score (IQR), kcal/kg/d 439 1.3 (0.5 to 2.5) 1.13 (1.00 to 1.26) .04 0.94 (0.82 to 1.08) .38 • Inactive, % 439 55.6 0.75 (0.52 to 1.10) .14 1.26 (0.79 to 2.00) .33 • Television viewing > 20 h/wk, % 439 17.5 1.04 (0.94 to 1.12) .44 1.04 (0.92 to 1.19) .53 • Median grip strength (IQR), kg 437 29.5 (22.5 to 39.0) 1.00 (0.98 to 1.01) .66 0.99 (0.97 to 1.01) .31 • Median isometric quadriceps strength (IQR), kg 436 23.5 (17.6 to 30.5) 1.00 (0.98 to 1.02) .79 1.02 (0.99 to 1.04) .15 • Median 6-min walk test distance (IQR), m 351 500.0 (428.5 to 560.0) 1.00 (1.00 to 1.00) .12 1.00 (1.00 to 1.00) .43 BMI—body mass index, COPD—chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, IQR—interquartile range, OR—odds ratio, PA—physical activity, PAC—PA counseling.
↵* Significantly more overweight or obese patients received PAC compared with patients who were not overweight or obese (24.3% vs 11.8%, P = .01).
↵† These variables were included in the second multivariate analysis model instead of no. of comorbidities.
↵‡ Significantly more patients with diabetes received PAC compared with patients who did not have diabetes (41.0% v. 16.6%, P < .001).
- Table 2.
Associations between FP and FMG characteristics and the assessment of PA level and PAC provided by FPs, nurses, or dietitians during the past 18 mo: PAC performed by at least 1 PHCP was significantly associated with the assessment of PA level performed by at least 1 PHCP (OR [95% CI] 5.05 [2.93 to 8.72], P < .01). Variables in bold were included in the multivariate analysis as independent variables.
CHARACTERISTICS PA LEVEL ASSESSMENT PAC OR (95% CI) P VALUE OR (95% CI) P VALUE FPs • Female sex 2.37 (1.60 to 3.51) < .01 1.54 (0.95 to 2.48) .08 • Age 0.97 (0.95 to 0.99) .01 0.97 (0.95 to 0.99) .01 • Experience 0.97 (0.96 to 0.99) .01 0.97 (0.95 to 0.99) < .01 • PA knowledge 1.02 (1.01 to 1.04) .01 1.00 (0.99 to 1.02) .79 • PAC self-efficacy 1.01 (1.00 to 1.02) .04 1.00 (0.99 to 1.01) .35 • Identity of the FP 1.00 (0.99 to 1.02) .55 0.99 (0.97 to 1.01) .21 FMGs • Leaflets on PA 0.54 (0.29 to 1.00) .05 0.83 (0.42 to 1.67) .61 • Canadian PA guidelines 1.21 (0.83 to 1.77) .31 1.31 (0.83 to 2.07) .24 • Pedometer used 0.82 (0.42 to 1.60) .56 0.80 (0.34 to 1.88) .62 • Effect of FMG 0.95 (0.89 to 1.01) .11 0.93 (0.86 to 1.01) .08 FMG—family medicine group, OR—odds ratio, PA—physical activity, PAC—PA counseling, PHCP—primary health care provider.
- Table 3.
Multivariate analysis to explain the assessment of PA provided by FPs, nurses, or dietitians during the past 18 mo: Nagelkerke R2 = 0.20; N = 339 patients.
CHARACTERISTIC MODEL 1 OR (95% CI) P VALUE FP experience 0.96 (0.94 to 1.00) .002 FP female sex 2.70 (1.61 to 4.50) < .001 Nurse encounters 1.26 (1.12 to 1.43) < .001 Physical component summary 1.03 (1.00 to 1.05) .03 Mental component summary 1.03 (1.00 to 1.05) .04 OR—odds ratio, PA—physical activity.
- Table 4.
Multivariate analysis to explain provision of PAC by FPs, nurses, or dietitians during the past 18 mo: In model 2, the no. of comorbidities was replaced by the comorbidities significantly associated with the dependent variables. Nagelkerke R2 = 0.31 for model 1; Nagelkerke R2 = 0.34 for model 2; N = 418 patients.
CHARACTERISTIC MODEL 1 MODEL 2 OR (95% CI) P VALUE OR (95% CI) P VALUE Assessment of PA performed by PHCPs 4.40 (2.35 to 7.44) < .01 4.32 (2.37 to 7.85) < .01 FP experience 0.97 (0.94 to 0.99) .01 0.97 (0.94 to 0.99) .01 Family annual income ≥ $55 000 0.53 (0.31 to 0.92) .03 0.56 (0.32 to 0.97) .04 Overweight or obese status 4.20 (1.93 to 9.06) < .01 3.21 (1.46 to 7.12) < .01 Nurse encounters 1.24 (1.12 to 1.37) < .01 1.22 (1.10 to 1.35) < .01 Physical component summary* 1.06 (1.02 to 1.09) < .01 1.06 (1.03 to 1.10) < .01 Type 2 diabetes or prediabetes* NA NA 2.84 (1.51 to 5.37) < .01 NA—not applicable, OR—odds ratio, PA—physical activity, PAC—PA counseling, PHCP—primary health care provider.
↵* In model 2, type 2 diabetes or prediabetes status appeared before physical component summary score.
In this issue
Jump to section
Related Articles
Cited By...
- Promotion of Physical Activity by Health Professionals (PROMOTE-PA): protocol for effectiveness outcomes in a hybrid type I effectiveness-implementation cluster randomised controlled trial
- Integration of exercise professionals to help patients adopt and maintain healthy movement behaviour: What are we waiting for?
- Intégration des professionnels en exercice pour aider les patients à adopter et maintenir un comportement de saine mobilité: Quattendons-nous?
- Delivering brief physical activity interventions in primary care: a systematic review