The design and conduct of Keep It Off: An online randomized trial of financial incentives for weight-loss maintenance.

Background Obesity continues to be a serious public health challenge. Rates are increasing worldwide, with nearly 70% of the US adults overweight or obese, leading to increased clinical and economic burden. While successful approaches for achieving weight loss have been identified, techniques for long-term maintenance of initial weight loss have largely been unsuccessful. Financial incentive interventions have been shown in several settings to be successful in motivating participants to adopt healthy behaviors. Purpose Keep It Off is a three-arm randomized controlled trial that compares the efficacy of a lottery-based incentive, traditional direct payment incentive, and control of daily feedback without any incentive for weight-loss maintenance. This design allows comparison of a traditional direct payment incentive with one based on behavioral economic principles that consider the underlying psychology of decision-making. Methods Participants were randomized in a 2:1 ratio for each active arm relative to control, with a targeted 188 participants in total. Eligible participants were those aged 30-80 who lost at least 11 lb (5 kg) during the first 4 months of participation in Weight Watchers, a national weight-loss program, with whom we partnered. The interventions lasted 6 months (Phase I); participants were followed for an additional 6 months without intervention (Phase II). The primary outcome is weight change from baseline to the end of Phase I, with the change at the end of Phase II a key secondary endpoint. Keep It Off is a pragmatic trial that recruited, consented, enrolled, and followed patients electronically. Participants were provided a wireless weight scale that electronically transmitted daily self-monitored weights. Weights were verified every 3 months at a Weight Watchers center local to the participant and electronically transmitted. Results Using the study web-based platform, we integrated recruitment, enrollment, and follow-up procedures into a digital platform that required little staff effort to implement and manage. We randomized 191 participants in less than 1 year. We describe the design of Keep It Off and implementation of enrollment. Lessons Learned We demonstrated that our pragmatic design was successful in rapid accrual of participants in a trial of interventions to maintain weight loss. Limitations Despite the nationwide reach of Weight Watchers, the generalizability of study findings may be limited by the characteristics of its members. The interventions under study are appropriate for settings where an entity, such as an employer or health insurance company, could offer them as a benefit. Conclusions Keep It Off was implemented and conducted with minimal staff effort. This study has the potential to identify a practical and effective weight-loss maintenance strategy.

Framing Financial Incentives to Increase Physical Activity Among Overweight and Obese Adults: A Randomized, Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Financial incentive designs to increase physical activity have not been well-examined. OBJECTIVE: To test the effectiveness of 3 methods to frame financial incentives to increase physical activity among overweight and obese adults. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT 02030119). SETTING: University of Pennsylvania. PARTICIPANTS: 281 adult employees (body mass index ≥27 kg/m2). INTERVENTION: 13-week intervention. Participants had a goal of 7000 steps per day and were randomly assigned to a control group with daily feedback or 1 of 3 financial incentive programs with daily feedback: a gain incentive ($1.40 given each day the goal was achieved), lottery incentive (daily eligibility [expected value approximately $1.40] if goal was achieved), or loss incentive ($42 allocated monthly upfront and $1.40 removed each day the goal was not achieved). Participants were followed for another 13 weeks with daily performance feedback but no incentives. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcome was the mean proportion of participant-days that the 7000-step goal was achieved during the intervention. Secondary outcomes included the mean proportion of participant-days achieving the goal during follow-up and the mean daily steps during intervention and follow-up. RESULTS: The mean proportion of participant-days achieving the goal was 0.30 (95% CI, 0.22 to 0.37) in the control group, 0.35 (CI, 0.28 to 0.42) in the gain-incentive group, 0.36 (CI, 0.29 to 0.43) in the lottery-incentive group, and 0.45 (CI, 0.38 to 0.52) in the loss-incentive group. In adjusted analyses, only the loss-incentive group had a significantly greater mean proportion of participant-days achieving the goal than control (adjusted difference, 0.16 [CI, 0.06 to 0.26]; P = 0.001), but the adjusted difference in mean daily steps was not significant (861 [CI, 24 to 1746]; P = 0.056). During follow-up, daily steps decreased for all incentive groups and were not different from control. LIMITATION: Single employer. CONCLUSION: Financial incentives framed as a loss were most effective for achieving physical activity goals. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute on Aging.

Individual Versus Team-Based Financial Incentives to Increase Physical Activity: A Randomized, Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: More than half of adults in the United States do not attain the minimum recommended level of physical activity to achieve health benefits. The optimal design of financial incentives to promote physical activity is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of individual versus team-based financial incentives to increase physical activity. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled trial comparing three interventions to control. PARTICIPANTS: Three hundred and four adult employees from an organization in Philadelphia formed 76 four-member teams. INTERVENTIONS: All participants received daily feedback on performance towards achieving a daily 7000 step goal during the intervention (weeks 1- 13) and follow-up (weeks 14- 26) periods. The control arm received no other intervention. In the three financial incentive arms, drawings were held in which one team was selected as the winner every other day during the 13-week intervention. A participant on a winning team was eligible as follows: $50 if he or she met the goal (individual incentive), $50 only if all four team members met the goal (team incentive), or $20 if he or she met the goal individually and $10 more for each of three teammates that also met the goal (combined incentive). MAIN MEASURES: Mean proportion of participant-days achieving the 7000 step goal during the intervention. KEY RESULTS: Compared to the control group during the intervention period, the mean proportion achieving the 7000 step goal was significantly greater for the combined incentive (0.35 vs. 0.18, difference: 0.17, 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 0.07-0.28, p <0.001) but not for the individual incentive (0.25 vs 0.18, difference: 0.08, 95 % CI: -0.02-0.18, p = 0.13) or the team incentive (0.17 vs 0.18, difference: -0.003, 95 % CI: -0.11-0.10, p = 0.96). The combined incentive arm participants also achieved the goal at significantly greater rates than the team incentive (0.35 vs. 0.17, difference: 0.18, 95 % CI: 0.08-0.28, p < 0.001), but not the individual incentive (0.35 vs. 0.25, difference: 0.10, 95 % CI: -0.001-0.19, p = 0.05). Only the combined incentive had greater mean daily steps than control (difference: 1446, 95 % CI: 448-2444, p ≤ 0.005). There were no significant differences between arms during the follow-up period (weeks 14- 26). CONCLUSIONS: Financial incentives rewarded for a combination of individual and team performance were most effective for increasing physical activity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02001194.

Individual- versus group-based financial incentives for weight loss: a randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Data on the effectiveness of employer-sponsored financial incentives for employee weight loss are limited. OBJECTIVE: To test the effectiveness of 2 financial incentive designs for promoting weight loss among obese employees. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01208350) SETTING: Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. PARTICIPANTS: 105 employees with a body mass index between 30 and 40 kg/m2. INTERVENTION: 24 weeks of monthly weigh-ins (control group; n = 35); individual incentive, designed as $100 per person per month for meeting or exceeding weight-loss goals (n = 35); and group incentive, designed as $500 per month split among participants within groups of 5 who met or exceeded weight-loss goals (n = 35). MEASUREMENTS: Weight loss after 24 weeks (primary outcome) and 36 weeks and changes in behavioral mediators of weight loss (secondary outcomes). RESULTS: Group-incentive participants lost more weight than control participants (mean between-group difference, 4.4 kg [95% CI, 2.0 to 6.7 kg]; P < 0.001) and individual-incentive participants (mean between-group difference, 3.2 kg [CI, 0.9 to 5.5 kg]; P = 0.008). Twelve weeks after incentives ended and after adjustment for 3-group comparisons, group-incentive participants maintained greater weight loss than control group participants (mean between-group difference, 2.9 kg [CI, 0.5 to 5.3 kg]; P = 0.016) but not greater than individual-incentive participants (mean between-group difference, 2.7 kg [CI, 0.4 to 5.0 kg]; P = 0.024). LIMITATION: Single employer and short follow-up. CONCLUSION: A group-based financial incentive was more effective than an individual incentive and monthly weigh-ins at promoting weight loss among obese employees at 24 weeks. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute on Aging.

Effect of Financial Incentives for Process, Outcomes, or Both on Cholesterol Level Change: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Financial incentives may improve health behaviors. It is unknown whether incentives are more effective if they target a key process (eg, medication adherence), an outcome (eg, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C] levels), or both. Objective: To determine whether financial incentives awarded daily for process (adherence to statins), awarded quarterly for outcomes (personalized LDL-C level targets), or awarded for process plus outcomes induce reductions in LDL-C levels compared with control. Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized clinical trial was conducted from February 12, 2015, to October 3, 2018; data analysis was performed from October 4, 2018, to May 27, 2021, at the University of Pennsylvania Health System, Philadelphia. Participants included 764 adults with an active statin prescription, elevated risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, suboptimal LDL-C level, and evidence of imperfect adherence to statin medication. Interventions: Interventions lasted 12 months. All participants received a smart pill bottle to measure adherence and underwent LDL-C measurement every 3 months. In the process group, daily financial incentives were awarded for statin adherence. In the outcomes group, participants received incentives for achieving or sustaining at least a quarterly 10-mg/dL LDL-C level reduction. The process plus outcomes group participants were eligible for incentives split between statin adherence and quarterly LDL-C level targets. Main Outcomes and Measures: Change in LDL-C level from baseline to 12 months, determined using intention-to-treat analysis. Results: Of the 764 participants, 390 were women (51.2%); mean (SD) age was 62.4 (10.0) years, 310 (40.6%) had diabetes, 298 (39.0%) had hypertension, and mean (SD) baseline LDL-C level was 138.8 (37.6) mg/dL. Mean LDL-C level reductions from baseline to 12 months were -36.9 mg/dL (95% CI, -42.0 to -31.9 mg/dL) among control participants, -40.0 mg/dL (95% CI, -44.7 to -35.4 mg/dL) among process participants, -41.6 mg/dL (95% CI, -46.3 to -37.0 mg/dL) among outcomes participants, and -42.8 mg/dL (95% CI, -47.4 to -38.1 mg/dL) among process plus outcomes participants. In exploratory analysis among participants with diabetes and hypertension, no spillover effects of incentives were detected compared with the control group on hemoglobin A1c level and blood pressure over 12 months. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, process-, outcomes-, or process plus outcomes-based financial incentives did not improve LDL-C levels vs control. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02246959.

Financial incentive strategies for maintenance of weight loss: results from an internet-based randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Financial incentives can improve initial weight loss; we examined whether financial incentives can improve weight loss maintenance. SUBJECTS/METHODS: Participants aged 30-80 years who lost at least 5 kg during the first 4-6 months in a nationally available commercial weight loss program were recruited via the internet into a three-arm randomized trial of two types of financial incentives versus active control during months 1-6 (Phase I) followed by passive monitoring during months 7-12 (Phase II). Interventions were daily self-weighing and text messaging feedback alone (control) or combined with a lottery-based incentive or a direct incentive. The primary outcome was weight change 6 months after initial weight loss. Secondary outcomes included weight change 12 months after initial weight loss (6 months after cessation of maintenance intervention), and self-reported physical activity and eating behaviors. RESULTS: Of 191 participants randomized, the mean age was 49.0 (SD = 10.5) years and weight loss prior to randomization was 11.4 (4.7) kg; 92% were women and 89% were White. Mean weight changes during the next 6 months (Phase I) were: lottery -3.0 (5.8) kg; direct -2.8 (5.8) kg; and control -1.4 (5.8) kg (all pairwise comparisons p > 0.1). Weight changes through the end of 12 months post-weight loss (Phase II) were: lottery -1.8 (10.5) kg; direct -0.7 (10.7) kg; and control -0.3 (9.4) kg (all pairwise comparisons p > 0.1). The percentages of participants who maintained their weight loss (defined as gaining ≤1.36 kg) were: lottery 79%, direct 76%, and control 67% at 6 months and lottery 66%, direct 62%, and control 59% at 12 months (all pairwise comparisons p > 0.1). At 6 and 12 months after initial weight loss, changes in self-reported physical activity or eating behaviors did not differ across arms. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the active control of daily texting based on daily home weighing, lottery-based and direct monetary incentives provided no additional benefit for weight loss maintenance.

A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Lottery-Based Financial Incentives to Increase Physical Activity Among Overweight and Obese Adults.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of lottery-based financial incentives in increasing physical activity. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: University of Pennsylvania Employees. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 209 adults with body mass index ≥27. INTERVENTIONS: All participants used smartphones to track activity, were given a goal of 7000 steps per day, and received daily feedback on performance for 26 weeks. Participants randomly assigned to 1 of the 3 intervention arms received a financial incentive for 13 weeks and then were followed for 13 weeks without incentives. Daily lottery incentives were designed as a "higher frequency, smaller reward" (1 in 4 chance of winning $5), "jackpot" (1 in 400 chance of winning $500), or "combined lottery" (18% chance of $5 and 1% chance of $50). MEASURES: Mean proportion of participant days step goals were achieved. ANALYSIS: Multivariate regression. RESULTS: During the intervention, the unadjusted mean proportion of participant days that goal was achieved was 0.26 in the control arm, 0.32 in the higher frequency, smaller reward lottery arm, 0.29 in the jackpot arm, and 0.38 in the combined lottery arm. In adjusted models, only the combined lottery arm was significantly greater than control ( P = .01). The jackpot arm had a significant decline of 0.13 ( P < .001) compared to control. There were no significant differences during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Combined lottery incentives were most effective in increasing physical activity.

Premium-Based Financial Incentives Did Not Promote Workplace Weight Loss In A 2013-15 Study.

Employers commonly use adjustments to health insurance premiums as incentives to encourage healthy behavior, but the effectiveness of those adjustments is controversial. We gave 197 obese participants in a workplace wellness program a weight loss goal equivalent to 5 percent of their baseline weight. They were randomly assigned to a control arm, with no financial incentive for achieving the goal, or to one of three intervention arms offering an incentive valued at $550. Two intervention arms used health insurance premium adjustments, beginning the following year (delayed) or in the first pay period after achieving the goal (immediate). A third arm used a daily lottery incentive separate from premiums. At twelve months there were no statistically significant differences in mean weight change either between the control group (whose members had a mean gain of 0.1 pound) and any of the incentive groups (delayed premium adjustment, -1.2 pound; immediate premium adjustment, -1.4 pound; daily lottery incentive, -1.0 pound) or among the intervention groups. The apparent failure of the incentives to promote weight loss suggests that employers that encourage weight reduction through workplace wellness programs should test alternatives to the conventional premium adjustment approach by using alternative incentive designs, larger incentives, or both.

A Randomized Trial of Social Comparison Feedback and Financial Incentives to Increase Physical Activity.

PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness of different combinations of social comparison feedback and financial incentives to increase physical activity. DESIGN: Randomized trial (Clinicaltrials.gov number, NCT02030080). SETTING: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred eighty-six adults. INTERVENTIONS: Twenty-six weeks of weekly feedback on team performance compared to the 50th percentile (n = 100) or the 75th percentile (n = 64) and 13 weeks of weekly lottery-based financial incentive plus feedback on team performance compared to the 50th percentile (n = 80) or the 75th percentile (n = 44) followed by 13 weeks of only performance feedback. MEASURES: Mean proportion of participant-days achieving the 7000-step goal during the 13-week intervention. ANALYSIS: Generalized linear mixed models adjusting for repeated measures and clustering by team. RESULTS: Compared to the 75th percentile without incentives during the intervention period, the mean proportion achieving the 7000-step goal was significantly greater for the 50th percentile with incentives group (0.45 vs 0.27, difference: 0.18, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.04 to 0.32; P = .012) but not for the 75th percentile with incentives group (0.38 vs 0.27, difference: 0.11, 95% CI: -0.05 to 0.27; P = .19) or the 50th percentile without incentives group (0.30 vs 0.27, difference: 0.03, 95% CI: -0.10 to 0.16; P = .67). CONCLUSION: Social comparison to the 50th percentile with financial incentives was most effective for increasing physical activity.

One-year results of the Think Health! study of weight management in primary care practices.

The Think Health! study evaluated a behavioral weight loss program adapted from the Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) lifestyle intervention to assist primary care providers (PCPs) and auxiliary staff acting as lifestyle coaches (LCs) in offering weight loss counseling to their patients. In a randomized trial conducted at five clinical sites, study participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio within each site to either "Basic Plus" (n = 137), which offered PCP counseling every 4 months plus monthly LC visits during the first year of treatment, or "Basic" (n = 124), which offered only PCP counseling every 4 months. Participants were primarily (84%) female, 65% African American, 16% Hispanic American, and 19% white. In the 72% of participants in each treatment group with a 12-month weight measurement, mean (95% CI) 1-year weight changes (kg) were -1.61 (-2.68, -0.53) in Basic Plus and -0.62 (-1.45, 0.20) in Basic (difference: 0.98 (-0.36, 2.33); P = 0.15). Results were similar in model-based estimates using all available weight data for randomized participants, adjusting for potential confounders. More Basic Plus (22.5%) than Basic (10.2%) participants lost ≥ 5% of their baseline weight (P = 0.022). In a descriptive, nonrandomized analysis that also considered incomplete visit attendance, mean weight change was -3.3 kg in Basic Plus participants who attended ≥ 5 LC visits vs. + 0.53 kg in those attending <5 LC visits. We conclude that the Basic Plus approach of moderate-intensity counseling by PCPs and their staff can facilitate modest weight loss, with clinically significant weight loss in high program attenders.

Design, recruitment and start up of a primary care weight loss trial targeting African American and Hispanic adults.

Primary care offices are critical access points for obesity treatment, but evidence for approaches that can be implemented within these settings is limited. The Think Health! (¡Vive Saludable!) Study was designed to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of a behavioral weight loss program, adapted from the Diabetes Prevention Program, for implementation in routine primary care. Recruitment of clinical sites targeted primary care practices serving African American and Hispanic adults. The randomized design compares (a) a moderate-intensity treatment consisting of primary care provider counseling plus additional counseling by an auxiliary staff member (i.e., lifestyle coach), with (b) a low-intensity, control treatment involving primary care provider counseling only. Treatment and follow up duration are 1 to 2 years. The primary outcome is weight change from baseline at 1 and 2 years post-randomization. Between November 2006 and January 2008, 14 primary care providers (13 physicians; 1 physician assistant) were recruited at five clinical sites. Patients were recruited between October 2007 and November 2008. A total of 412 patients were pre-screened, of whom 284 (68.9%) had baseline assessments and 261 were randomized, with the following characteristics: 65% African American; 16% Hispanic American; 84% female; mean (SD) age of 47.2 (11.7) years; mean (SD) BMI of 37.2(6.4) kg/m(2); 43.7% with high blood pressure; and 18.4% with diabetes. This study will provide insights into the potential utility of moderate-intensity lifestyle counseling delivered by motivated primary care clinicians and their staff. The study will have particular relevance to African Americans and women.