2 research outputs found
Effectiveness of a brief behavioural intervention to prevent weight gain over the Christmas holiday period: randomised controlled trial
OBJECTIVE
To test the effectiveness of a brief behavioural
intervention to prevent weight gain over the Christmas
holiday period.
DESIGN
Two group, double blinded randomised controlled
trial.
SETTING
Recruitment from workplaces, social media platforms,
and schools pre-Christmas 2016 and 2017 in
Birmingham, UK.
PARTICIPANTS
272 adults aged 18 years or more with a body mass
index of 20 or more: 136 were randomised to a brief
behavioural intervention and 136 to a leaflet on
healthy living (comparator). Baseline assessments
were conducted in November and December with
follow-up assessments in January and February (4-8
weeks after baseline).
INTERVENTIONS
The intervention aimed to increase restraint of
eating and drinking through regular self weighing
and recording of weight and reflection on weight
trajectory; providing information on good weight
management strategies over the Christmas period;
and pictorial information on the physical activity
calorie equivalent (PACE) of regularly consumed
festive foods and drinks. The goal was to gain no more
than 0.5 kg of baseline weight. The comparator group
received a leaflet on healthy living.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
The primary outcome was weight at follow-up. The
primary analysis compared weight at follow-up
between the intervention and comparator arms,
adjusting for baseline weight and the stratification
variable of attendance at a commercial weight loss
programme. Secondary outcomes (recorded at followup) were: weight gain of 0.5 kg or less, self reported
frequency of self weighing (at least twice weekly
versus less than twice weekly), percentage body fat,
and cognitive restraint of eating, emotional eating,
and uncontrolled eating.
RESULTS
Mean weight change was −0.13 kg (95% confidence
interval −0.4 to 0.15) in the intervention group and
0.37 kg (0.12 to 0.62) in the comparator group. The
adjusted mean difference in weight (intervention−
comparator) was −0.49 kg (95% confidence interval
−0.85 to −0.13, P=0.008). The odds ratio for gaining
no more than 0.5 kg was non-significant (1.22, 95%
confidence interval 0.74 to 2.00, P=0.44).
CONCLUSION
A brief behavioural intervention involving regular
self weighing, weight management advice, and
information about the amount of physical activity
required to expend the calories in festive foods and
drinks prevented weight gain over the Christmas
holiday period
Gender differences in response to an opportunistic brief intervention for obesity in primary care: data from the BWeL trial
Weight loss programmes appeal mainly to women, prompting calls for gender-specific programmes. In the United Kingdom, general practitioners (GPs) refer nine times as many women as men to community weight loss programmes. GPs endorsement and offering programmes systematically could reduce this imbalance. In this trial, consecutively attending patients in primary care with obesity were invited and 1882 were enrolled and randomized to one of two opportunistic 30-second interventions to support weight loss given by GPs in consultations unrelated to weight. In the support arm, clinicians endorsed and offered referral to a weight loss programme and, in the advice arm, advised that weight loss would improve health. Generalized linear mixed effects models examined whether gender moderated the intervention. Men took effective weight loss action less often in both arms (support: 41.6% vs 60.7%; advice: 12.1% vs 18.3%; odds ratio (OR) = 0.38, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.27, 0.52, P < .001) but there was no evidence that the relative effect differed by gender (interaction P = .32). In the support arm, men accepted referral and attended referral less often, 69.3% vs 82.4%; OR = 0.48, 95% CI, 0.35, 0.66, P < .001 and 30.4% vs 47.6%; OR = 0.48, 95% CI, 0.36, 0.63, P < .001, respectively. Nevertheless, the gender balance in attending weight loss programmes closed to 1.6:1. Men and women attended the same number of sessions (9.7 vs 9.1 sessions, P = .16) and there was no evidence weight loss differed by gender (6.05 kg men vs 4.37 kg women, P = .39). Clinician-delivered opportunistic 30-second interventions benefits men and women equally and reduce most of the gender imbalance in attending weight loss programmes