Choosing to engage and choosing to persist: The role of non-specific factors in health-promoting activities

Objective
Non-specific factors play an important role in determining benefits from health-promoting activities. Previous studies have focussed on beneficial outcomes of motivation during engagement. There are two aims of this project. First, we investigated whether expectancy and intrinsic motivation influence people's decisions to engage with health-promoting activities in the first instance and then subsequently adhere to them. Second, we examined the effects of providing information on health-promoting activities as a method of influencing expectancy and intrinsic motivation.

Method
In two studies, participants were informed about a health-promoting activity (Study 1: A breathing exercise for well-being; Study 2: A gratitude exercise for smoking cessation) and told that it has either a ‘known’ or ‘unknown’ effectiveness. Participants were then given the opportunity to engage with the activity over the following days. Expectancy and intrinsic motivation were measured after reading the information and prior to engagement with the activity. Adherence to the activity was measured at follow-up.

Results
In both studies, intrinsic motivation positively predicted willingness to engage with the activities as well as subsequent adherence. Expectancy predicted adherence in Study 1 and choices to engage in Study 2, but not after controlling for intrinsic motivation. Describing the gratitude exercise as having a known effectiveness in Study 2 enhanced motivation and adherence to the activity.

Conclusions
The non-specific benefit brought by intrinsic motivation plays an important role in choosing to engage with health-promoting activities as well as subsequent adherence. Our results also show that simple statements about the potential benefits of a health-promoting activity can motivate engagement and adherence.

Impact of non-pharmacological interventions on prevention and treatment of delirium in critically ill patients: protocol for a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative research

Background: Critically ill patients have an increased risk of developing delirium during their intensive care stay.To date, pharmacological interventions have not been shown to be effective for delirium management but non-pharmacological interventions have shown some promise. The aim of this systematic review is to identify effective non-pharmacological interventions for reducing the incidence or the duration of delirium in critically ill patients.

Methods: We will search MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, AMED, psycINFO and the Cochrane Library.We will include studies of critically ill adults and children. We will include randomised trials and controlled trials which measure the effectiveness of one or more non-pharmacological interventions in reducing incidence or duration ofdelirium in critically ill patients. We will also include qualitative studies that provide an insight into patients and their families’ experiences of delirium and non-pharmacological interventions. Two independent reviewers will assess studies for eligibility, extract data and appraise quality. We will conduct meta-analyses if possible or present results narratively.Qualitative studies will also be reviewed by two independent reviewers, and a specially designed quality assessment tool incorporating the CASP framework and the POPAY framework will be used to assess quality.

Discussion: Although non-pharmacological interventions have been studied in populations outside of intensive care units and multicomponent interventions have successfully reduced incidence and duration of delirium, no systematic review of non-pharmacological interventions specifically targeting delirium in critically ill patients have been undertaken to date. This systematic review will provide evidence for the development of a multicomponent intervention for delirium management of critically ill patients that can be tested in a subsequent multicentre randomised trial.