The aim of this study was to report the key findings from the PACINPAT trial investigating the efficacy of a theory-based, individually tailored in-person and telephone-based physical activity counseling intervention designed for in-patients with MDD to promote a physically active lifestyle.
There was no evidence to support the primary hypotheses. The results of our study showed that against expectations, participants from the intervention group did not significantly differ in minutes of MVPA per day compared to participants from the control group over a 12-month intervention period. These results add to the current body of research and represent a valuable contribution to the evidence regarding the promotion of physical activity in patients with MDD. Namely that, a theory-based physical activity counseling approach might not necessarily improve physical behavior, underlining that it is challenging to overcome the issue of insufficient physical activity in individuals with MDD.
4.1. Physical activity levels
Given the relatively high baseline levels of MVPA observed in our sample, the present study seems to corroborate that Swiss clinics are successful in integrating exercise, sport and other physical activity opportunities in their clinical structures (Brand et al., 2016), which is in line with international recommendations (Stubbs et al., 2018). However, this study also shows that the level of physical activity drops once patients leave the hospital and return to their own natural live circumstances.
These results diverge from previous findings on physical activity counseling interventions. For instance, a prior physical activity counseling intervention based on BCTs delivered remotely to insufficiently physically active (healthy) adults showed a statistically significant increase in accelerometer-based MVPA in the intervention compared to the control group over a 6-month period (Fischer et al., 2019). Conversely, the results from our study showed no statistically significant difference in accelerometer-based MVPA when comparing both groups in the short or long-term, whereas self-reported MVPA increased in both groups. Increased levels of self-reported MVPA were also found in a study population of out-patients with MDD, however, significantly more so in the participants receiving physical activity counseling compared to those receiving only treatment as usual (Chalder et al., 2012). Possible reasons for these diverging outcomes could be the different study populations (in-patients vs. out-patients), differences in the study design or intervention implementation. For instance, Chalder et al. (2012) were able to recruit a larger sample (361 patients), used motivational interviewing and applied an additional face-to-face meeting later during the intervention phase. While symptom severity was comparable in both studies, the fact that the first data assessment took place during in-patient treatment (and not in natural life circumstances) may have complicated the detection of increased physical activity levels in our trial. However, this does not explain why we did not observe any significant time by group effects in our population. One possible explanation is that we used a placebo control group which also received some basic form of physical activity counseling. Another explanation might be that out-patients respond better to remote physical activity counseling. Previous studies have also shown that programs, in which patients meet the coach more often, and practice exercise and sport activities together with the coach have positive effects (Zeibig et al., 2023; Zeibig et al., 2021), a finding which was also observed in treatment-resistant patients with depression (Mota-Pereira et al., 2011). As we have highlighted in our qualitative analysis, participating in a physical activity counseling program may put pressure on some patients to fail in another endeavor (Cody et al., 2022). Therefore, closer accompaniment at the beginning of the intervention might be helpful to counteract this pressure and to optimize the efficacy of physical activity counseling in in-patients.
4.2. Physical activity counseling
As shown in our study, physical activity counseling in in-patients with MDD remains a challenge (Gerber et al., 2016) because patients may present with negative motivational profiles (Cody et al., 2022), which may complicate self-regulation of physical activity behavior (Gerber et al., 2023). This in turn, may explain the high dropout rate in the present study and the fact that physical activity remained nearly unchanged after discharge from the clinic. In the case of lacking evidence for an intervention effect, alternative explanations are possible to account for the non-significant differences. For instance, it is possible that the intervention was effective, but insufficiently implemented. Alternatively, it could be that the intervention in fact was not effective (Borrelli, 2011). According to our implementation evaluation, the intervention reached the intended population in varying doses, and the fidelity was continuously monitored and predominantly achieved with few adaptations which were well-documented (R. Cody et al., 2023). More specifically, 16% of the participants receiving the intervention dropped out after only two counseling sessions, whereas 36% received up to 75% of the intended intervention dose and 44% received 75% or more of the intended dose. However, additional analyses showed that participants who received low and high intervention doses had similar profiles with regard to objectively measured MVPA across the intervention period. In addition, we acknowledge that due to the Covid-19 pandemic, we were not able to recruit the intended minimal sample size of 334 participants. With regard to the intervention content, fidelity to the underlying theory was given according to documentation by our trained intervention implementers (coaches). More specifically, BCTs evidenced to improve physical activity behavior according to a meta-analyses (Dejonghe et al., 2017; Howlett et al., 2018) were indeed implemented (R. Cody et al., 2023). Furthermore, there is evidence suggesting that the intervention may have been effective for only a sub-population of the study participants. According to a qualitative analysis of the PACINPAT trial, the intervention was experienced in four distinguishable ways with only one (expansive experience) leading to increased wellbeing and maintained physical activity levels (Cody et al., 2022). In this sense, the heterogeneity of experiences of the individuals in the study may have contributed to the absence of an intervention effect.
In the case of the intervention itself being ineffective, meta-analytic data of RCTs suggest that interventions based on socio-cognitive theories to increase physical activity overall show small effect sizes (standard mean differences from 0.2 to 0.3), and these may even be overestimated due to methodological weaknesses (Bernard et al., 2017). Hence, interventions solely relying on socio-cognitive theories may in fact not be the best approach. Increasing evidence suggests that affective responses to exercise activities have been neglected so far in cognition-based approaches (i.e., theory-based approaches) to promote physical activity (Hohberg et al., 2022). It is plausible that our limited focus on affective components may have been particularly unfortunate in a population of participants with an affective disorder, often characterized by anhedonia (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Evidence suggests that people with MDD do feel a favorable affective response following physical activity (Bourke et al., 2022). Along these lines, the PACINPAT intervention was tailored specifically to factors pertaining to physical activity (e.g. physical activity goals and preferences), however, there was a lack of tailoring to disease-specific factors, such as affective state and disease experience (Cody et al., 2022). Highly personalized lifestyle medicine has been implemented in a patient with cardiovascular disease with very positive results, such as weight loss, reduction in medication and improvement in fitness (Dvorák et al., 2022). Hence, this approach may also be recommended for people with other chronic diseases such MDD. This may also include applying a multidisciplinary approach, which has been evidenced to significantly improve total activity and increase MVPA in in-patients with severe mental illness (Deenik et al., 2019).
Practical implications
In future interventions for patients with MDD, it may be beneficial to focus more strongly on affective responses to exercise in addition to a theory-based cognitive approach (Hohberg et al., 2022; Jones & Zenko, 2023). This may entail more in-person contact during the initial phase counseling sessions, allowing the coach and participant to try activities together to identify a facilitating situational framework for regular physical activity as well as activities that lead to positive affective responses. A focus on cognitive factors – as implemented in this study – can follow after, especially because the implementation evaluation revealed that most of the patients who completed the intervention were satisfied with the coach (86%) and would recommend it to other patients (63%) (R. Cody et al., 2023). An alternative solution could be a group-based approach. Both individual and group sessions are known to be effective in the promotion of physical activity (Nyström et al., 2015), hence, a combination of both could be beneficial. While group exercise can increase affective responses (Dunton et al., 2015), individual sessions can be optimally tailored (Hawkins et al., 2008). In addition, multidisciplinary approaches could be considered to promote health in different domains (Deenik et al., 2019). This approach has been used in transdiagnostic patients, resulting in the effective treatment of different mental illnesses patterns as well as the promotion of physical activity (Zeibig et al., 2023).
Methodological considerations
Within the PACINPAT study, there was a risk for selection bias, e.g., participants who were willing to engage in the trial were inherently more interested in physical activity and the promotion thereof. This means that these results cannot be generalized across all in-patients with MDD. However, according to the drop-out analyses, there were no significant differences between those participants who took part and those who were lost to follow-up. A further potential source of bias lies in the applied self-report measures, which are prone to recall and social desirability bias. However, this issue was counteracted by collecting accelerometer-based physical activity data. Another limitation was that we adjusted the analysis of the accelerometer data in the interest of not losing an excessive amount of data. For a valid measure, 4 days were required (as opposed to 5 days or more) and 8 hours per day (as opposed to 10 hours). However, evidence shows that 4 days are representative of 1 week (Donaldson et al., 2016; Wüthrich et al., 2022), and that there are no meaningful differences between 8, 10 and 12 hours of wear time (Aadland & Ylvisåker, 2015). Hence, our approach led to the consideration of more data without compromising reliability and validity of the measure (Migueles et al., 2017). Moreover, the follow-up assessment was performed directly after the completion of the intervention, which means that we do not know how physical activity behavior developed after completion of the counseling intervention. We also acknowledge that participants were not only heterogeneous with regard to the experience and responses to the intervention, they also varied with regard to medical and psychotherapeutic treatments provided by the clinics and had varying durations of in-patient treatment. However, these effects should not have a bearing on the results because of the randomized study design. Finally, it could be that the Covid-19 pandemic may have affected the intervention. However, we were able to show that participants included before vs. after the outbreak of the pandemic did neither differ with regard to psychopathology nor physical activity behavior (Cody et al., 2021).