Key result
A self-efficacy coaching intervention did not significantly improve exercise self-efficacy, barriers self-efficacy, or independent exercise minutes compared to attention control (p > .10).
Why the study?
Does a self-efficacy coaching intervention improve exercise self-efficacy, barriers self-efficacy, and minutes of independent exercise in cardiac rehabilitation participants?
RCT (n=65)
Does a self-efficacy coaching intervention improve exercise self-efficacy, barriers self-efficacy, and minutes of independent exercise in cardiac rehabilitation participants?
A self-efficacy coaching intervention did not significantly improve exercise self-efficacy or independent exercise minutes compared to an attention control in cardiac rehabilitation participants.
Adherence to independent exercise is an essential outcome of cardiac rehabilitation (CR), yet limited theory-based interventions to improve adherence exist. This study tested the effects of an intervention based on Bandura's conceptualization of self-efficacy. The self-efficacy coaching intervention (SCI), a supplement to standard care, was designed to increase self-efficacy for independent exercise and independent exercise behavior in CR. We examined whether the SCI vs. attention control (AC) resulted in improved exercise self-efficacy (ESE), barriers self-efficacy (BARSE), and minutes of independent exercise for CR participants (n = 65). While between-group differences did not reach significance (p > .10) for any of the outcome measures, significant within-group changes were noted in BARSE scores and independent exercise (p < .001) for the SCI group. Change in independent exercise for the AC group was also significant (p =. 006). Further study is needed to explore whether short-term changes translate into maintenance of independent exercise participation after program completion.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Barkley et al. (2013) conducted an RCT in Cardiac rehabilitation (n=65). Self-efficacy coaching intervention (SCI) vs. Attention control (AC) was evaluated on Exercise self-efficacy (ESE), barriers self-efficacy (BARSE), and minutes of independent exercise (p=>.10). A self-efficacy coaching intervention did not significantly improve exercise self-efficacy, barriers self-efficacy, or independent exercise minutes compared to attention control (p > .10).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: