Background Cardiovascular imaging interventions are widely used to convey messages regarding cardiovascular disease risk, individual capability to adopt lifestyle changes, and the potential benefits of adhering to therapy or behaviour change. Such interventions have the potential to change misconceptions and promote positive beliefs and attitudes toward health-related behaviours. Despite the potential impact of cardiovascular imaging interventions on key determinants of health behaviours, it is unclear whether they have any impact on health beliefs and behavioural intentions. This review aimed to assess the impact of vascular screening interventions on health beliefs and behavioural intentions.

Methods Studies conducted among adults with no history or symptoms of CVD, screened using noninvasive imaging modalities, and provided information about screening findings were considered. We searched MEDLINE, PsychINFO, Social Work Abstracts, Psychology and Behavioural Sciences Collection, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) via EBSCOhost. Key search terms included carotid ultrasound, behaviour, risk perception, medication adherence, and smoking. We screened 1633 articles from electronic databases and citations from published systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The risk of bias ratings were completed, and the findings were presented using a narrative approach.

Results Outcomes related to health beliefs and/or behavioural interventions were reported in 10 studies. Of these, seven measured behavioural intentions and perceived susceptibility and three measured self-efficacy beliefs and/or outcome expectancies. Perceived susceptibility to CVD increased in individuals with abnormal results when compared with individuals who received imaging results suggesting no or low cardiovascular risk. Interventions appear to have an impact on self-efficacy beliefs (3 studies showed increases in self-efficacy beliefs post-intervention) but not on response efficacy beliefs (only 1 of 3 studies showed positive changes in outcome expectancy in participants). Evidence related to imaging results and behavioural intentions was slightly mixed (2 of 3 studies showed changes in intentions to modify diet, engage in physical activity, and use prescribed medication in individuals with abnormal results). In addition, evidence related to the type of screening results received and the intention to cease smoking is mixed.

Conclusion Our review demonstrates that cardiovascular imaging interventions can potentially modify risk perceptions, self-efficacy beliefs, and behavioural intentions. However, our findings suggest that these interventions may not adequately influence response efficacy beliefs, indicating an area for further exploration and refinement. These findings have implications for the design and implementation of future cardiovascular health interventions.