Skip to main content

Table 2 Effectiveness comparison (competency and attitudes): number agreeing with statement/total number of staff and (percentage)

From: Long-term impact of a real-world coordinated lifestyle promotion initiative in primary care: a quasi-experimental cross-sectional study

  3-year follow-up (2011) 5-year follow-up (2013)
Intervention ( n  = 77), n/N (%) Control ( n  = 43), n/N (%) P value 1 P value 2adjusted by centre Intervention ( n  = 76), n/N (%) Control ( n  = 56), n/N (%) P value 1 P value 2adjusted by centre
Self-reported attitude
There is a need for a Lifestyle team or similar initiative at my centre 67/73 (92) 30/39 (77) 0.028a 0.026 66/71 (93) 34/43 (79) 0.029a 0.225
It is important that primary care centres offer support regarding healthy living 69/72 (96) 38/39 (97) 1.000b 0.699 71/71 (100) 42/43 (98) 0.377b 3
Lifestyle counselling is an efficient method to support patients in behaviour change 70/70 (100) 33/37 (89) 0.013b 3 61/64 (95) 39/43 (91) 0.435b 0.490
Issues regarding healthy lifestyle promotion are prioritized at my centre 36/69 (52) 7/35 (20) 0.002a <0.001 30/64 (47) 5/36 (14) 0.001a <0.001
Self-reported competency
I have sufficient competency to give patients lifestyle advice 65/73 (89) 38/41 (93) 0.744b <0.001 62/70 (89) 36/42 (86) 0.658a 0.687
During a typical consultation I have sufficient time to discuss healthy living with patients 38/73 (52) 15/40 (38) 0.138a 0.085 35/70 (50) 17/44 (39) 0.236a 0.324
There is sufficient competency (knowledge, skills) at my centre to manage issues regarding healthy lifestyle promotion 69/70 (99) 31/38 (82) 0.003b 0.002 71/71 (100) 38/42 (90) 0.017b 3
Sometimes it is uncomfortable to bring up healthy living with patients 22/73 (30) 13/40 (33) 0.795a 0.760 32/68 (47) 16/44 (36) 0.264 0.154
  1. 1Significance of difference between intervention and control determined by the χ2 testa or the Fisher exact testb.
  2. 2Significance of difference between intervention and control determined by logistic regression using robust standard errors in order to adjust for clustering by centre.
  3. 3Allocation group with too few numbers in some cells due to complete agreement. Adjusted P value cannot be estimated.