"I Want a Program That Looks at My Whole Life." A Focus Group Study on the Ideal Components for an mHealth Weight Management Program for African American Women.

BACKGROUND: The high rate of obesity, ownership of smartphones, and online search for nutrition and dieting information among African American women (AAW) provide a unique opportunity to develop cost-effective, accessible, and acceptable mHealth weight management programs for them. Furthermore, they should participate in the development and evaluation of these programs. OBJECTIVE: To explore ideal components of a culturally relevant mHealth weight management program for AAW and to examine how these components may vary by age group. DESIGN: Twelve focus group triads were conducted with AAW in north central Florida. The framework method was used to manage, organize, synthesize, and analyze data themes by age groups: 18 to 29 (young), 30 to 50 (middle age), and 51+ (older). PARTICIPANTS/SETTING: Thirty-six smartphone owners who expressed a desire to lose weight were recruited through several community partnerships. RESULTS: Based on body mass index (BMI), young women were classified as overweight (BMI 26.23 ± 6.7), middle-aged women as obese (BMI30.72 ± 8.31), and older women as obese (BMI 31.03 ± 5.67). Most searched online for dieting information within the past 12 months. Five overarching themes for designing mHealth weight management programs were identified: (1) holistic program that goes beyond dieting; (2) social media integration for support and sense of community; (3) self-monitoring app; (4) two-way text messaging; and (5) programs of varying lengths and meaningful incentives. CONCLUSION: AAW were receptive to mHealth weight management programs, which may be appealing during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Holistic programs of 4 to 6 weeks that addressed stress eating, had a social media component, and included a few educational texts per week may be appealing to AAW.

A weight loss intervention delivered by peer coaches in primary care: Rationale and study design of the PROMISE trial.

Primary care offers a familiar and accessible clinical venue for patients with obesity to receive evidence-based lifestyle interventions for weight management. However, there are numerous barriers to the implementation of such programs in primary care, and previous primary care weight loss interventions demonstrate modest and temporary effects. Weight loss treatment delivered within primary care by peer coaches may offer a viable and effective alternative. The purpose of this trial is to test the effects of weight loss treatment that includes ongoing support from a peer coach (i.e., trained, salaried community health workers) as compared to self-directed treatment. Peer coach treatment will be delivered over 18 months and includes a combination of in-person, group-based office visits and individual telephone contacts. This weight loss trial will include 375 adults with obesity (BMI = 30-50 kg/m2) randomized from 10 primary care practices. The primary outcome will be changes in body weight at month 18. Secondary outcomes will include key patient-centered outcomes, including quality-of-life, physical and social functioning, mood, and treatment satisfaction. The cost-effectiveness of the peer coach intervention will also be evaluated. If this novel intervention is effective, it could offer a practical and sustainable approach for the delivery of weight loss treatment in primary care that has the potential to improve clinical outcomes for patients, increase treatment options for primary care providers, and reduce obesity-related healthcare utilization and costs.

Cost evaluation of providing evidence-based dietetic services for weight management in adults: In-person versus eHealth delivery.

AIM: To compare the theoretical costs of best-practice weight management delivered by dietitians in a traditional, in-person setting compared to remote consultations delivered using eHealth technologies. METHODS: Using national guidelines, a framework was developed outlining dietitian-delivered weight management for in-person and eHealth delivery modes. This framework mapped one-on-one patient-dietitian consultations for an adult requiring active management (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 ) over a one-year period using both delivery modes. Resources required for both the dietitian and patient to implement each treatment mode were identified, with costs attributed for material, fixed, travel and personnel components. The resource costs were categorised as either establishment or recurring costs associated with the treatment of one patient. RESULTS: Establishment costs were higher for eHealth compared to in-person costs ($1394.21 vs $90.05). Excluding establishment costs, the total (combined dietitian and patient) cost for one patient receiving best-practice weight management for 12 months was $560.59 for in-person delivery, compared to $389.78 for eHealth delivery. Compared to the eHealth mode, a higher proportion of the overall recurring delivery costs was attributed to the patient for the in-person mode (46.4% and 33.9%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Although it is initially more expensive to establish an eHealth service mode, the overall reoccurring costs per patient for delivery of best-practice weight management were lower compared to the in-person mode. This theoretical cost evaluation establishes preliminary evidence to support alternative obesity management service models using eHealth technologies. Further research is required to determine the feasibility, efficacy and cost-effectiveness of these models within dietetic practice.

Feasibility and acceptability of a physician-delivered weight management programme.

BACKGROUND: Primary health care requires new approaches to assist patients with overweight and obesity. This is a particular concern for patients with limited access to specialist or allied health services due to financial cost or location. The Change Program is a toolkit that provides a structured approach for GPs working with patients on weight management. OBJECTIVE: To assess the acceptability and feasibility of a GP-delivered weight management programme. METHODS: A feasibility trial in five Australian general practices with 12 GPs and 23 patients. Mixed methods were used to assess the objective through participant interviews, online surveys and the NOrmalization MeAsure Development (NoMAD) tool based on Normalization Process Theory. Content analysis of interviews is presented alongside Likert scales, free text and the NoMAD tool. RESULTS: The Change Program was acceptable to most GPs and patients. It was best suited to patient-GP dyads where the patient felt a strong preference for GP involvement. Patients' main concerns were the time and possible cost associated with the programme if run outside a research setting. For sustainable implementation, it would have been preferable to recruit a whole practice rather than single GPs to enable activation of systems to support the programme. CONCLUSION: A GP-delivered weight management programme is feasible and acceptable for patients with obesity in Australian primary health care. The addition of this structured toolkit to support GPs is particularly important for patients with a strong preference for GP involvement or who are unable to access other resources due to cost or location.

An economy of scales: A selective review of obesity's economic causes, consequences, and solutions.

This paper reviews the economic research on obesity, covering topics such as the measurement of, and trends in, obesity, the economic causes of obesity (e.g. the monetary price and time cost of food, food assistance programs, income, education, macroeconomic conditions, and peer effects), and the economic consequences of obesity (e.g. lower wages, a lower probability of employment, and higher medical care costs). It also examines the extent to which obesity imposes negative externalities, and economic interventions that could potentially internalize such externalities, such as food taxes, subsidies for school-based physical activity programs, and financial rewards for weight loss. It discusses other economic rationales for government intervention with respect to obesity, such as imperfect information, time inconsistent preferences, and irrational behavior. It concludes by proposing a research agenda for the field. Overall, the evidence suggests that there is no single dominant economic cause of obesity; a wide variety of factors may contribute a modest amount to the risk. There is consistent evidence regarding the economic consequences of obesity, which are lower wages and higher medical care costs that impose negative externalities through health insurance. Studies of economic approaches to preventing obesity, such as menu labeling, taxes on energy-dense foods, and financial rewards for weight loss find only modest effects on weight and thus a range of policies may be necessary to have a substantial effect on the prevalence of obesity.

Study design and protocol for a theory-based behavioral intervention focusing on maintenance of weight loss: the Maintenance After Initiation of Nutrition TrAINing (MAINTAIN) study.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is a significant public health problem. Although various lifestyle approaches are effective for inducing significant weight loss, few effective behavioral weight maintenance strategies have been identified. It has been proposed that behavior maintenance is a distinct state that involves different psychological processes and behavioral skills than initial behavior change. Previously, we created a conceptual model that distinguishes behavior initiation from maintenance. This model was used to generate Maintenance After Initiation of Nutrition TrAINing (MAINTAIN), an intervention to enhance weight loss maintenance following initiation. The effectiveness of MAINTAIN is being evaluated in an ongoing trial, the rationale and procedures of which are reported herein. METHODS/DESIGN: Veterans aged ≤ 75 with body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m(2) participate in a 16-week, group-based weight loss program. Participants who lose ≥ 4 kg by the end of 16 weeks (target n = 230) are randomized 1:1 to receive (a) usual care for 56 weeks or (b) MAINTAIN, a theoretically-informed weight loss maintenance intervention for 40 weeks, followed by 16 weeks of no intervention contact. MAINTAIN involves 3 in-person group visits that transition to 8 individualized telephone calls with decreasing contact frequency. MAINTAIN focuses on satisfaction with outcomes, weight self-monitoring, relapse prevention, and social support. We hypothesize that, compared to usual care, MAINTAIN will result in at least 3.5 kg less regain and better relative levels of caloric intake and physical activity over 56 weeks, and that it will be cost-effective. DISCUSSION: If effective, MAINTAIN could serve as a model for redesigning existing weight loss programs. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01357551.

The incremental value of medical nutrition therapy in weight management.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the incremental cost of and health benefits attributable to medical nutrition therapy (MNT) for managed care members participating in an obesity-related health management program. DESIGN: Retrospective case-control. METHODOLOGY: Overweight or obese adult managed care members who utilized the MNT benefit (n = 291) were matched, using propensity score matching, with similar individuals (n = 1,104) who did not utilize the MNT benefit. Health outcomes data on weight, body mass index (BMI), waist circumference, and physical exercise were collected via surveys administered at baseline and approximately 2 years later. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Both groups experienced statistically significant reductions in weight, BMI, and waist circumference and increases in exercise frequency. Compared with matched controls, individuals who received MNT were about twice as likely to achieve a clinically significant reduction in weight, with an adjusted odds ratio of 2.2 (95% confidence interval, -1.7-2.9; P < .001). They also experienced greater average reductions in weight (3.1 vs. 1.4 kg; beta = -1.75; t[1314] = -2.21; P = .028) and were more likely to exercise more frequently after participating in the program (F[1,1358] = 4.07, P = .044). There was no difference between the groups in waist circumference. The MNT benefit was used by 5% of eligible members and cost $0.03 per member per month. CONCLUSION: MNT is a valuable adjunct to health management programs that can be implemented for a relatively low cost. MNT warrants serious consideration as a standard inclusion in health benefit plans.

Neurolinguistic programming: a systematic review of the effects on health outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Neurolinguistic programming (NLP) in health care has captured the interest of doctors, healthcare professionals, and managers. AIM: To evaluate the effects of NLP on health-related outcomes. DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic review of experimental studies. METHOD: The following data sources were searched: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, ASSIA, AMED, CINAHL, Web of Knowledge, CENTRAL, NLP specialist databases, reference lists, review articles, and NLP professional associations, training providers, and research groups. RESULTS: Searches revealed 1459 titles from which 10 experimental studies were included. Five studies were randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and five were pre-post studies. Targeted health conditions were anxiety disorders, weight maintenance, morning sickness, substance misuse, and claustrophobia during MRI scanning. NLP interventions were mainly delivered across 4-20 sessions although three were single session. Eighteen outcomes were reported and the RCT sample sizes ranged from 22 to 106. Four RCTs reported no significant between group differences with the fifth finding in favour of the NLP arm (F = 8.114, P<0.001). Three RCTs and five pre-post studies reported within group improvements. Risk of bias across all studies was high or uncertain. CONCLUSION: There is little evidence that NLP interventions improve health-related outcomes. This conclusion reflects the limited quantity and quality of NLP research, rather than robust evidence of no effect. There is currently insufficient evidence to support the allocation of NHS resources to NLP activities outside of research purposes.