Multiple health behaviour change interventions for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in primary care: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: It is uncertain whether multiple health behaviour change (MHBC) interventions are effective for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in primary care. A systematic review and a meta-analysis were performed to evaluate the effectiveness of MHBC interventions on CVD risk and CVD risk factors; the study also evaluated associations of theoretical frameworks and intervention components with intervention effectiveness.

METHODS: The search included randomised controlled trials of MHBC interventions aimed at reducing CVD risk in primary prevention population up to 2017. Theoretical frameworks and intervention components were evaluated using standardised methods. Meta-analysis with stratification and meta-regression were used to evaluate intervention effects.

RESULTS: We identified 31 trials (36 484 participants) with a minimum duration of 12 months follow-up. Pooled net change in systolic blood pressure (16 trials) was -1.86 (95% CI -3.17 to -0.55; p=0.01) mm Hg; diastolic blood pressure (15 trials), -1.53 (-2.43 to -0.62; p=0.001) mm Hg; body mass index (14 trials), -0.13 (-0.26 to -0.01; p=0.04) kg/m(2); serum total cholesterol (14 trials), -0.13 (-0.19 to -0.07; p<0.001) mmol/L. There was no significant association between interventions with a reported theoretical basis and improved intervention outcomes. No association was observed between intervention intensity (number of sessions and intervention duration) and intervention outcomes. There was significant heterogeneity for some risk factor analyses, leading to uncertain validity of some pooled net changes.

CONCLUSIONS: MHBC interventions delivered to CVD-free participants in primary care did not appear to have quantitatively important effects on CVD risk factors. Better reporting of interventions' rationale, content and delivery is essential to understanding their effectiveness.