Hamburg Center for Health Economics, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.
Hamburg Center for Health Economics, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.
Health Policy. 2019 Dec;123(12):1199-1209. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2019.09.008. Epub 2019 Oct 2.
In this systematic literature review, we identify evidence on the effectiveness of nudges in improving the self-management of adults with chronic diseases and derive policy recommendations. We included empirical studies of any design published up to April 12, 2018. We synthesized the results of the studies narratively by comparing statistical significance and direction of different nudge types' effects on primary study outcomes. Lastly, we categorized the nudges according to their degree of manipulation and transparency. We identified 26 studies, where 13 were of high or moderate quality. The most commonly tested nudges were reminders, planning prompts, small financial incentives, and feedback. Overall, 8 of 9 studies with a high or moderate quality ranking, focused on self-management outcomes, i.e., physical activity, attendance, self-monitoring, and medication adherence, found that nudges had significant positive effects. However, only 1 of 4 studies of high or moderate quality, analyzing disease control outcomes (e.g., glycemic control), found that nudges had a significant positive effect for one intervention arm. In summary, this review demonstrates that nudges can improve chronic disease self-management, but there is hardly any evidence to date that these interventions lead to improved disease control. Reminders, feedback, and planning prompts appear to improve chronic disease self-management most consistently and are among the least controversial types of nudges. Accordingly, they can generally be recommended to policymakers.
在这项系统文献回顾中,我们确定了有关推动因素在改善慢性病成人自我管理方面有效性的证据,并得出了政策建议。我们纳入了截至 2018 年 4 月 12 日发表的任何设计的实证研究。我们通过比较不同推动类型对主要研究结果的影响的统计显著性和方向,以叙述方式综合了研究结果。最后,我们根据推动因素的操纵程度和透明度对其进行了分类。我们确定了 26 项研究,其中 13 项具有较高或中等质量。最常测试的推动因素是提醒、计划提示、小额经济激励和反馈。总体而言,8 项高质量或中等质量的研究(重点是自我管理结果,如体育活动、出勤率、自我监测和药物依从性)发现推动因素具有显著的积极影响。然而,仅 4 项高质量或中等质量的研究(分析疾病控制结果,如血糖控制)发现,推动因素对一个干预组有显著的积极影响。总之,这篇综述表明,推动因素可以改善慢性病的自我管理,但迄今为止几乎没有证据表明这些干预措施可以改善疾病控制。提醒、反馈和计划提示似乎最能持续地改善慢性病的自我管理,并且是最具争议性的推动因素之一。因此,它们通常可以向政策制定者推荐。