Evaluating the Potential of a Novel Metabolic Syndrome Severity Score to Inform Exercise Interventions for People with Complex Chronic Conditions.

Aims: Exercise interventions positively affect numerous cardiometabolic risk factors. To better evaluate the health effects of exercise training, it may be more appropriate to evaluate risk factors together. The Metabolic Syndrome Severity Score (MetSSS) is a composite score representing cardiometabolic risk. Purpose: To evaluate the relationships between physical activity, neuromuscular fitness, exercise capacity, and the MetSSS in a heterogenous sample of people with complex chronic disease. Material and Methods: Fifty-three people with kidney or liver disease and at least one feature of the metabolic syndrome (MetS) were included. Pearson correlations were conducted between physical activity, neuromuscular fitness, exercise capacity, and the MetSSS. Linear regressions were performed for multi-level categorical variables. Independent variables with an association with MetSSS (P ≤ 0.2) were included in a multiple regression analysis. Results: The 6-minute walk test (6MWT) distance was inversely and independently associated with MetSSS [standardized beta coefficient (ß) = -0.31, P = 0.04]. No relationship was found between MetSSS and physical activity or neuromuscular fitness. Mean 6MWT in the highest tertile was 550 m (range: 505-620 m) and 346 m (range: 233-408 m) in the lowest. The analysis showed a medium-large between-group effect for the difference in MetSSS for the lowest and highest tertile of 6MWT [Eta squared (η2) = 0.16, P = 0.01]. Conclusions: Exercise capacity was inversely and independently associated with MetSSS in people with complex chronic disease. Clinical trials with exercise interventions are needed to further investigate if improvements in exercise capacity result in clinically significant changes in the MetSSS.

Utilizing Technology for Diet and Exercise Change in Complex Chronic Conditions Across Diverse Environments (U-DECIDE): Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The metabolic syndrome is common across many complex chronic disease groups. Advances in health technology have provided opportunities to support lifestyle interventions. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to test the feasibility of a health technology-assisted lifestyle intervention in a patient-led model of care. METHODS: The study is a single-center, 26-week, randomized controlled trial. The setting is specialist kidney and liver disease clinics at a large Australian tertiary hospital. The participants will be adults with a complex chronic condition who are referred for dietetic assessment and display at least one feature of the metabolic syndrome. All participants will receive an individualized assessment and advice on diet quality from a dietitian, a wearable activity monitor, and standard care. Participants randomized to the intervention group will receive access to a suite of health technologies from which to choose, including common base components (text messages) and optional components (online and mobile app-based nutrition information, an online home exercise program, and group-based videoconferencing). Exposure to the optional aspects of the intervention will be patient-led, with participants choosing their preferred level of engagement. The primary outcome will be the feasibility of delivering the program, determined by safety, recruitment rate, retention, exposure uptake, and telehealth adherence. Secondary outcomes will be clinical effectiveness, patient-led goal attainment, treatment fidelity, exposure demand, and participant perceptions. Primary outcome data will be assessed descriptively and secondary outcomes will be assessed using an analysis of covariance. This study will provide evidence on the feasibility of the intervention in a tertiary setting for patients with complex chronic disease exhibiting features of the metabolic syndrome. RESULTS: The study was funded in 2019. Enrollment has commenced and is expected to be completed by June 2022. Data collection and follow up are expected to be completed by December 2022. Results from the analyses based on primary outcomes are expected to be submitted for publication by June 2023. CONCLUSIONS: The study will test the implementation of a health technology-assisted lifestyle intervention in a tertiary outpatient setting for a diverse group of patients with complex chronic conditions. It is novel in that it embeds patient choice into intervention exposure and will inform health service decision-makers in regards to the feasibility of scale and spread of technology-assisted access to care for a broader reach of specialist services. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN12620001282976; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=378337. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/37556.

Interventions for weight loss in people with chronic kidney disease who are overweight or obese.

BACKGROUND: Obesity and chronic kidney disease (CKD) are highly prevalent worldwide and result in substantial health care costs. Obesity is a predictor of incident CKD and progression to kidney failure. Whether weight loss interventions are safe and effective to impact on disease progression and clinical outcomes, such as death remains unclear. OBJECTIVES: This review aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of intentional weight loss interventions in overweight and obese adults with CKD; including those with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) being treated with dialysis, kidney transplantation, or supportive care. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 14 December 2020 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs of more than four weeks duration, reporting on intentional weight loss interventions, in individuals with any stage of CKD, designed to promote weight loss as one of their primary stated goals, in any health care setting. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed study eligibility and extracted data. We applied the Cochrane 'Risk of Bias' tool and used the GRADE process to assess the certainty of evidence. We estimated treatment effects using random-effects meta-analysis. Results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes together with 95% confidence intervals (CI) or mean differences (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous outcomes or in descriptive format when meta-analysis was not possible. MAIN RESULTS: We included 17 RCTs enrolling 988 overweight or obese adults with CKD. The weight loss interventions and comparators across studies varied. We categorised comparisons into three groups: any weight loss intervention versus usual care or control; any weight loss intervention versus dietary intervention; and surgical intervention versus non-surgical intervention. Methodological quality was varied, with many studies providing insufficient information to accurately judge the risk of bias. Death (any cause), cardiovascular events, successful kidney transplantation, nutritional status, cost effectiveness and economic analysis were not measured in any of the included studies. Across all 17 studies many clinical parameters, patient-centred outcomes, and adverse events were not measured limiting comparisons for these outcomes. In studies comparing any weight loss intervention to usual care or control, weight loss interventions may lead to weight loss or reduction in body weight post intervention (6 studies, 180 participants: MD -3.69 kg, 95% CI -5.82 to -1.57; follow-up: 5 weeks to 12 months, very low-certainty evidence). In very low certainty evidence any weight loss intervention had uncertain effects on body mass index (BMI) (4 studies, 100 participants: MD -2.18 kg/m², 95% CI -4.90 to 0.54), waist circumference (2 studies, 53 participants: MD 0.68 cm, 95% CI -7.6 to 6.24), proteinuria (4 studies, 84 participants: 0.29 g/day, 95% CI -0.76 to 0.18), systolic (4 studies, 139 participants: -3.45 mmHg, 95% CI -9.99 to 3.09) and diastolic blood pressure (4 studies, 139 participants: -2.02 mmHg, 95% CI -3.79 to 0.24). Any weight loss intervention made little or no difference to total cholesterol, high density lipoprotein cholesterol, and inflammation, but may lower low density lipoprotein cholesterol. There was little or no difference between any weight loss interventions (lifestyle or pharmacological) compared to dietary-only weight loss interventions for weight loss, BMI, waist circumference, proteinuria, and systolic blood pressure, however diastolic blood pressure was probably reduced. Furthermore, studies comparing the efficacy of different types of dietary interventions failed to find a specific dietary intervention to be superior for weight loss or a reduction in BMI. Surgical interventions probably reduced body weight (1 study, 11 participants: MD -29.50 kg, 95% CI -36.4 to -23.35), BMI (2 studies, 17 participants: MD -10.43 kg/m², 95% CI -13.58 to -7.29), and waist circumference (MD -30.00 cm, 95% CI -39.93 to -20.07) when compared to non-surgical weight loss interventions after 12 months of follow-up. Proteinuria and blood pressure were not reported. All results across all comparators should be interpreted with caution due to the small number of studies, very low quality of evidence and heterogeneity across interventions and comparators. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: All types of weight loss interventions had uncertain effects on death and cardiovascular events among overweight and obese adults with CKD as no studies reported these outcome measures. Non-surgical weight loss interventions (predominately lifestyle) appear to be an effective treatment to reduce body weight, and LDL cholesterol. Surgical interventions probably reduce body weight, waist circumference, and fat mass. The current evidence is limited by the small number of included studies, as well as the significant heterogeneity and a high risk of bias in most studies.

Practice Patterns Relating to the Use of Intradialytic Parenteral Nutrition in Australian Renal Units: Results From a Survey of Renal Dietitians.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to document the patterns of usage regarding intradialytic parenteral nutrition (IDPN) within in-center hemodialysis units in Australia. DESIGN AND METHODS: This study used purposive non-probabilistic sampling to obtain details of the proportion of units using IDPN; formulations used; infusion rates; and barriers and enablers to usage. All participants were practicing renal dietitians in Australia. The participants were recruited from professional nephrology networks and completed a cross-sectional self-administered online survey. RESULTS: A total of 68 responses were received, representing 41% of dialysis units in Australia. Half did not use IDPN at all, and one-third (38.2%) used it regularly. The most common IDPN formulations used were triple phase bags (48.3%) and lipid-only infusions (22.6%). Variation in practice was seen regarding maximum infusion rates for some formulations. Costs for IDPN were borne by dialysis units (74%) or pharmacy (16%). Barriers to the use of IDPN included bureaucratic hurdles and misconceptions about IDPN as an effective form of nutrition support. The presence of a protocol, support from medical and other staff, and dietitian experience were enablers to the use IDPN. CONCLUSIONS: IDPN use in Australia is not uncommon. This survey extends the small evidence base about the practice of IDPN and identified some important variations in practice. Some barriers to IDPN use could be overcome with further training to support staff. Enablers to IDPN use include protocols with defined responsibilities and access to experienced clinicians.

Heart rate biofeedback fails to enhance children's ability to identify time spent in moderate to vigorous physical activity.

Physical activity recommendations for children in several countries advise that all young people should accumulate at least 60 min of moderate to vigorous physical activity every day. Perceiving physical activity intensity, however, can be a difficult task for children and it is not clear whether children can identify their levels of moderate to vigorous physical activity in accordance with the recommended guidelines. This study aimed to (1) explore whether children can identify time spent in moderate to vigorous physical activity; and (2) investigate whether heart rate biofeedback would improve children's ability to estimate time spent in moderate to vigorous physical activity. Thirty seven children (15 boys and 22 girls, mean age 12.6 years) wore data recording Polar E600 heart rate monitors during eight physical education lessons. At the end of each lesson children's estimated time in zone was compared to their actual time in zone. During a six lesson Intervention phase, one class was assigned to a biofeedback group whilst the other class acted as the control group and received no heart rate biofeedback. Post-Intervention, students in the biofeedback group were no better than the control group at estimating time spent in zone (mean relative error of estimation biofeedback group: Pre-Intervention 41±32% to Post-Intervention 28±26%; control group: Pre-Intervention 40±39% to Post-Intervention 31±37%). Thus it seems that identifying time spent in moderate to vigorous physical activity remains a complex task for children aged 11-13 even with the help of heart rate biofeedback.