Randomized controlled trial of Web-based weight-loss intervention with human support for male workers under 40.

OBJECTIVES: Human support can boost weight reduction in Internet-based weight-loss intervention. However, the most effective way to combine human support and the Internet for weight loss is unclear. This study aimed to examine the effects of two weight-loss programs for male workers aged 18-39 that combined different intensities of human support with website support compared to a delayed-intervention group (control group; CG), in a randomized controlled trial. METHODS: Seventy-one participants with overweight or obesity were allocated to one of three 12-week treatment programs. The Standard Support Group (SSG) was provided support via website and two face-to-face group guidance sessions, at the beginning and at the end of the program along with monthly general emails throughout the program. The Enhanced Support Group (ESG) received four remote support sessions based on Supportive Accountability (SA) in addition to the SSG. The CG was provided the same program as SSG after the other two groups had completed the program. The primary outcome was body weight reduction. RESULTS: ESG participants reduced their weight significantly more than SSG and CG participants (P = 0.038, P < 0.001, respectively), and SSG participants reduced their weight significantly more than CG participants (P = 0.033). CONCLUSIONS: The additional remote human support provided to the participants in the ESG was beneficial for weight loss in male workers. The low-intensity program provided to the SSG was also effective. Further studies with more participants in diverse settings and with participants who are less interested in their health and weight management are needed.

Effects of sedative and non-sedative H1 antagonists on cognitive tasks: behavioral and near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) examinations.

RATIONALE: It is well known that the newer H1-receptor antagonists elicit better performance of working memory and selective attention relative to the first generation drugs in this class. However, the neural correlates of the poorer performance associated with first-generation H1-receptor antagonists remain unknown. OBJECTIVES: This study examined the effects of first- and second-generation H1-receptor antagonists on neural correlates of cognitive tasks using near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS), a novel method of brain imaging suitable for psychological experiments. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We measured the NIRS responses of 12 healthy volunteer subjects during the performance of working memory, selective attention, and visual perception tasks, 3 h after taking a first-generation antagonist (ketotifen), second-generation antagonist (epinastine), or placebo. We also measured subjective sleepiness by visual analogue scale (VAS) test. RESULTS: Cortical activation at the lateral prefrontal region increased during the performance of working memory and selective attention tasks in subjects receiving epinastine and placebo but not in those who took ketotifen. No significant difference was observed at the occipital region in the visual perception task among the three drug groups. VAS score and the behavioral performance during working memory and visual perception tasks indicated sedative effects of ketotifen consistent with the findings of previous studies. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the neural response for working memory and selective attention task was impaired by the administration of ketotifen in comparison with that of epinastine and placebo. The sedative effect in the neural response was not observed after epinastine administration.