RESUMEN
Rationale: Short-term weight loss is possible in a variety of settings. However, long-term, free-living weight loss maintenance following structured weight loss interventions remains elusive. Objective: The purpose was to study body weight trajectories over 2 years of intensive lifestyle intervention (ILI) and up to 4 years of follow-up versus usual care (UC). Methods: Data were obtained from electronic medical records (EMRs) from participating clinics. Baseline (Day 0) was established as the EMR data point closest but prior to the baseline date of the trial. The sample included 111 ILI and 196 UC patients. The primary statistical analysis focused on differentiating weight loss trajectories between ILI and UC. Results: The ILI group experienced significantly greater weight loss compared with the UC group from Day 100 to Day 700, beyond which there were no significant differences. Intensive lifestyle intervention patients who maintained ≥5% and ≥10% weight loss at 24 months demonstrated significantly greater weight loss (p < 0.001) across the active intervention and follow-up. Conclusions: Following 24 months of active intervention, patients with ILI regained weight toward their baseline to the point where ILI versus UC differences were no longer statistically or clinically significant. However, patients in the ILI who experienced ≥5% or ≥10% weight loss at the cessation of the active intervention maintained greater weight loss at the end of the follow-up phase. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02561221.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Following the high morbidity and mortality due to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections in New Orleans, Louisiana, we sought to assess progress toward herd immunity. METHODS: Ochsner Health employees and patients who volunteered for Abbott SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibody test between March 1 and May 1, 2020 were included. We estimated IgG prevalence and used logistic regression to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for variables associated with IgG test status. RESULTS: Of the 13,343 participants with IgG test results, 78.6% were women, 70.6% were non-Hispanic White, 21.1% non-Hispanic Black, 2.9% Hispanic Americans and 5.4% belonged to other races. Overall, 7.99% (95% CI: 7.53-8.45%) of the participants tested IgG positive. In age-, sex- and body mass index (BMI)-adjusted analyses, non-Hispanic Blacks were 2.7-times more likely to test positive than non-Hispanic Whites (OR=2.72; 95% CI: 2.33-3.19). Corresponding ORs (95% CIs) were 1.29 (0.84-1.99) for Hispanic Americans and 1.22 (0.85-1.75) for Other race/ethnicities. Compared to participants in administrative occupations, physician assistants (OR=7.14; 95% CI: 1.72-29.6) and therapists (OR=4.74; 95% CI: 1.49-15.03) were significantly more likely to have IgG antibodies while the association among nurses was not significant (OR=2.35; 95% CI: 0.96-5.77). Relative to 1.40, the test threshold for positivity, our measurements indicate a strong immune response (5.38±1.69), especially among those with a higher BMI. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-COV-2 IgG antibodies were prevalent only in 8% of the participants. IgG prevalence was highest among non-Hispanic Blacks and participants with higher BMI but was lower among older participants.