Skip to main content
. 2024 Dec 31;29(1):101168. doi: 10.1016/j.bjpt.2024.101168

Table 3.

Summary of findings and certainty of evidence GRADE.

Effect of physical therapist-delivered MI with minimal intervention vs. minimal intervention alone
Certainty assessment
№ of patients
Effect
Certainty Comments
№ of studies Study design Risk of bias Inconsistency Indirectness Imprecision Other considerations Intervention Control Absolute
(95 % CI)
Physical activity
3 randomised trials not serious not serious not serious seriousa noneb 114 122 SMD 0.21 SD higher
(0.05 lower to 0.47 higher)
⨁⨁⨁◯
Moderate
Physical therapist-delivered MI likely increases physical activity slightly when combined with and compared to minimal intervention
Self efficacy
2 randomised trials not serious seriousc not serious very seriousd noneb 50 45 SMD 0.51 SD higher
(0.35 lower to 1.38 higher)
⨁◯◯◯
Very low
Physical therapist-delivered MI may increase self-efficacy when combined with and compared to minimal intervention but the evidence is very uncertain
Health related QoL
2 randomised trials not serious seriousc not serious very seriousd noneb 50 45 SMD 0.73 SD higher
(0.64 lower to 2.11 higher)
⨁◯◯◯
Very low
Physical therapist-delivered MI may increase health-related quality of life when combined with and compared to minimal intervention but the evidence is very uncertain
Effect of physical therapist-delivered MI and comprehensive rehabilitation vs. comprehensive rehabilitation alone
Physical activity
3 randomised trials not serious not serious not serious seriousa noneb 50 53 SMD 0.02 SD higher
(0.37 lower to 0.41 higher)
⨁⨁⨁◯
Moderate
Physical therapist-delivered MI likely results in no difference in physical activity when combined with and compared to comprehensive rehabilitation
Self-efficacy
2 randomised trials not serious not serious not serious seriousa noneb 71 77 SMD 0.23 SD higher
(0.1 lower to 0.55 higher)
⨁⨁⨁◯
Moderate
Physical therapist-delivered MI likely increases self-efficacy slightly when combined with and compared to comprehensive rehabilitation
Health related QoL
2 randomised trials not serious not serious not serious very seriousc noneb 34 44 SMD 0.18 SD higher
(0.27 lower to 0.63 higher)
⨁⨁◯◯
Low
Physical therapist-delivered MI may result in little to no difference in health-related QoL when combined with and compared to comprehensive rehabilitation
6MWT
3 randomised trials not serious not serious not serious seriousa noneb 53 64 SMD 0.15 SD higher
(0.21 lower to 0.52 higher)
⨁⨁⨁◯
Moderate
Physical therapist-delivered MI likely results in little to no difference in endurance when combined with and compared to comprehensive rehabilitation

CI, confidence interval; MI, motivational interviewing; QoL, quality of life; SMD, standardised mean difference.

Explanations.

a. Downgraded by 1 as the CI of the SMD includes the possibility of no effect.

b. Publication bias was undetected, though the included studies were small, no trials had industry influence and the included trials showed a range of positive and negative effects, therefore we did not downgrade for publication bias .

c. Downgraded by 1 due to substantial heterogeneity (I2 >50 %).

d. Downgraded by 2 as the CI of the SMD is wide (i.e. >0.8) indicating imprecision and includes the possibility of no effect.

CI, confidence interval; MI, motivational interviewing; QoL, quality of life; SMD, standardised mean difference; 6MWT, 6 min walk test.

Explanations.

a. Downgraded by 1 as the CI of the SMD includes the possibility of no effect.

b. Publication bias was undetected, though the included studies were small, no trials had industry influence and the included trials showed a range of positive and negative effects, therefore we did not downgrade for publication bias.

c. Downgraded by 2 as the CI of the SMD is wide (i.e. >0.8) indicating imprecision and includes the possibility of no effect.