Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2023 Jan 13;23(1):95.
doi: 10.1186/s12889-022-14874-3.

Behavioural Change Techniques in Health Coaching-Based Interventions for Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Behavioural Change Techniques in Health Coaching-Based Interventions for Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abdullah N Almulhim et al. BMC Public Health. .

Abstract

Background: Given the high rates globally of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM), there is a clear need to target health behaviours through person-centred interventions. Health coaching is one strategy that has been widely recognised as a tool to foster positive behaviour change. However, it has been used inconsistently and has produced mixed results. This systematic review sought to explore the use of behaviour change techniques (BCTs) in health coaching interventions and identify which BCTs are linked with increased effectiveness in relation to HbA1C reductions.

Methods: In line with the PICO framework, the review focused on people with T2DM, who received health coaching and were compared with a usual care or active control group on HbA1c levels. Studies were systematically identified through different databases including Medline, Web of science, and PsycINFO searches for relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in papers published between January 1950 and April 2022. The Cochrane collaboration tool was used to evaluate the quality of the studies. Included papers were screened on the reported use of BCTs based on the BCT taxonomy. The effect sizes obtained in included interventions were assessed by using Cohen's d and meta-analysis was used to estimate sample-weighted average effect sizes (Hedges' g).

Results: Twenty RCTs with a total sample size of 3222 were identified. Random effects meta-analysis estimated a small-sized statistically significant effect of health coaching interventions on HbA1c reduction (g+ = 0.29, 95% CI: 0.18 to 0.40). A clinically significant HbA1c decrease of ≥5 mmol/mol was seen in eight studies. Twenty-three unique BCTs were identified in the reported interventions, with a mean of 4.5 (SD = 2.4) BCTs used in each study. Of these, Goal setting (behaviour) and Problem solving were the most frequently identified BCTs. The number of BCTs used was not related to intervention effectiveness. In addition, there was little evidence to link the use of specific BCTs to larger reductions in HbA1c across the studies included in the review; instead, the use of Credible source and Social reward in interventions were associated with smaller reductions in HbA1c.

Conclusion: A relatively small number of BCTs have been used in RCTs of health coaching interventions for T2DM. Inadequate, imprecise descriptions of interventions and the lack of theory were the main limitations of the studies included in this review. Moreover, other possible BCTs directly related to the theoretical underpinnings of health coaching were absent. It is recommended that key BCTs are identified at an early stage of intervention development, although further research is needed to examine the most effective BCTs to use in health coaching interventions.

Trial registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021228567 .

Keywords: Behaviour change techniques; Health behaviour change; Health coaching; Self-management; Type 2 diabetes.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The other authors have no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
PRISMA Flow Diagram Showing Study Selection Process
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Risk of bias of included studies

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Khan MAB, Hashim MJ, King JK, Govender RD, Mustafa H, Kaabi JA. Epidemiology of Type 2 Diabetes – Global Burden of Disease and Forecasted Trends. J Epidemiol Glob Health. 2020;10(1):107. doi: 10.2991/jegh.k.191028.001. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Type 2 diabetes. 2021. https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/basics/type2.html. Accessed 4 Apr 2022.
    1. Global Report on Diabetes WHO . Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data Global report on diabetes. 2016.
    1. Galaviz KI, Narayan KMV, Lobelo F, Weber MB. Lifestyle and the Prevention of Type 2 Diabetes: A Status Report. Am J Lifestyle Med. 2018;12(1):4–20. doi: 10.1177/1559827615619159. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Liu J, Ren Z-H, Qiang H, Wu J, Shen M, Zhang L, Lyu J. Trends in the incidence of diabetes mellitus: results from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017 and implications for diabetes mellitus prevention. BMC Public Health. 2020;20(1):1415. doi: 10.1186/s12889-020-09502-x. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Substances