Pain catastrophizing in borderline morbidly obese and morbidly obese individuals with osteoarthritic knee pain

OBJECTIVE: There is limited information about how morbidly obese osteoarthritis (OA) patients cope with the pain they experience. Pain catastrophizing is an important predictor of pain and adjustment in persons with persistent pain. This may be particularly relevant in the morbidly obese (body mass index [BMI] of 40 kg/m2 or greater) OA population at risk for increased pain. The present study first examined whether borderline morbidly obese and morbidly obese OA patients report higher levels of pain catastrophizing than a sample of OA patients in the overweight and obese category (BMI between 25 kg/m2 and 34 kg/m2). Next, it examined how pain catastrophizing is related to important indexes of pain and adjustment in borderline morbidly obese and morbidly obese OA patients

Go!: results from a quasi-experimental obesity prevention trial with hospital employees

Abstract Background Worksite obesity prevention interventions using an ecological approach may hold promise for reducing typical weight gain. The purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness of Go!, an innovative 12-month multi-component worksite obesity prevention intervention. Methods A quasi-experimental non-equivalent control group design was utilized; 407 eligible hospital employees (intervention arm) and 93 eligible clinic employees (comparison arm) participated. The intervention involved pedometer distribution, labeling of all foods in the worksite cafeteria and vending machines (with calories, step equivalent, and a traffic light based on energy density signaling recommended portion), persuasive messaging throughout the hospital, and the integration of influential employees to reinforce healthy social norms. Changes in weight, BMI, waist circumference, physical activity, and dietary behavior after 6 months and 1 year were primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes included knowledge, perceptions of employer commitment to employee health, availability of information about diet, exercise, and weight loss, perceptions of coworker support and frequency of health discussions with coworkers. A process evaluation was conducted as part of the study. Results Repeated measures ANCOVA indicated that neither group showed significant increases in weight, BMI, or waist circumference over 12 months. The intervention group showed a modest increase in physical activity in the form of walking, but decreases in fruit and vegetable servings and fiber intake. They also reported significant increases in knowledge, information, perceptions of employer commitment, and health discussions with peers. Employees expressed positive attitudes towards all components of the Go! intervention. Conclusions This low-intensity intervention was well-received by employees but had little effect on their weight over the course of 12 months. Such results are consistent with other worksite obesity prevention studies using ecological approaches. Implementing low-impact physical activity (e.g., walking, stair use) may be more readily incorporated into the worksite setting than more challenging behaviors of altering dietary habits and increasing more vigorous forms of physical activity. Trial Registration This study was registered with clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT01585480 ) on April 24, 2012

Health equity considerations for developing and reporting patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials: A report from the omeract equity special interest group

Copyright © 2017. All rights reserved. Objective: Despite advances integrating patient-centered outcomes into rheumatologic studies, concerns remain regarding their representativeness across diverse patient groups and how this affects equity. The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Equity Working Group aims to determine whether and how to address equity issues within the core outcome sets of domains and instruments. Methods: We surveyed current and previous OMERACT meeting attendees and members of the Campbell and Cochrane Equity Group regarding whether to address equity issues within the OMERACT Filter 2.0 Core Outcome Sets and how to assess the appropriateness of domains, instruments, and measurement properties among diverse patients. At OMERACT 2016, results of the survey and a narrative review of differential psychosocial effects of rheumatoid arthritis (i.e., on men) were presented to stimulate discussion and develop a research agenda. Results: We proposed 6 moments for which an equity lens could be added to the development, selection, or testing of patient-reported outcome measures (PROM): (1) recruitment, (2) domain selection, (3) feasibility in diverse settings, (4) instrument validity, (5) thresholds of meaning, and (6) consideration of statistical power of subgroup analyses for outcome reporting. Conclusion: There is a need to (1) conduct a systematic review to assess how equity and population characteristics have been considered in PROM development and whether these differences influence the ranking of importance of outcome domains or a patient's response to questionnaire items, and (2) conduct the same survey described above with patients representing groups experiencing health inequities. The Journal of Rheumatolog