Healthcare professionals’ practices and barriers in assessing and promoting physical activity in primary care: a descriptive study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Healthcare professionals working in primary care are well positioned to provide initial physical activity counseling owing to their frequent patient contact and their role as a trusted source of health information. Unfortunately, despite health benefits and recommendations, physical activity assessment and promotion in primary care settings is not a routine practice. Because there are currently no standardized practices, it is essential to know what practices are currently employed and explore the barriers to their use. The aim of this study is twofold: first, to describe and compare the practices used by primary care healthcare professionals regarding physical activity assessment and promotion among chronic disease patients and second, to explore the barriers to their use. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among primary care healthcare professionals. The questionnaire designed for this project on physical activity assessment and promotion practices was sent electronically to all 619 primary care healthcare professionals in the Mauricie and Centre-du-Quebec regions. Each item was evaluated with a 5-point Likert scale. Descriptive statistics were used to describe sociodemographic characteristics as well as physical activity assessment and promotion practices. Group comparisons were performed according to professionals' roles. RESULTS: Sixty-eight (11%) of the healthcare professionals responded to the questionnaire. Both physical activity assessment and promotion practices were reported at similar levels, with mean scores of 3.79 ± 1.05 and 3.69 ± 0.78, respectively, on a 5-point Likert scale. A few specific tools and methods are used by healthcare professionals to assess and promote physical activity. The main barriers to physical activity assessment and promotion during clinical consultation were patients' perceived lack of interest in physical activity and professionals' lack of knowledge regarding PA guidelines, tools and methods, and contraindications. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, primary care healthcare professionals are convinced of the benefits of physical activity in preventing and treating chronic diseases and recognize they have an important role to play. Although committed to promoting physical activity among chronic disease patients, they require continuous training on guidelines, validated tools, and motivational interviews together with clear advice to properly implement physical activity assessment and promotion practices.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».