68 research outputs found

    Comparing the effectiveness of a multi-component weight loss intervention in adults with and without intellectual disabilities

    Get PDF
    <p>Background: The prevalence of obesity in adults with intellectual disabilities (ID) is rising, although the evidence base for its treatment in this population group is minimal. Weight management interventions that are accessible to adults with ID will reduce the inequalities that they frequently experience in health services. This short report compared the effectiveness of weight management in those with and without ID who completed nine sessions of a multi-component weight management programme.</p> <p>Methods: TAKE 5 is a 16-week multi-component weight management intervention for adults with ID and obesity [body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg m–2]. This intervention is an adaption of the weight management programme provided by the Glasgow & Clyde Weight Management Service (GCWMS) for adults without ID and obesity (National Health Service based). Fifty-two participants of the TAKE 5 programme were individually matched by baseline characteristics (sex, age and BMI) with two participants without ID of the GCWMS programme. Comparisons in terms of weight and BMI change and rate of weight loss were made for those who attended all nine sessions.</p> <p>Results: There were no significant differences between the groups in the amount of weight loss (median: −3.6 versus −3.8 kg, respectively, P = 0.4), change in BMI (median: −1.5 versus −1.4 kg m–2, P = 0.9), success of achieving 5% weight loss (41.3% versus 36.8%, P = 0.9) and rate of weight loss across the 16-week intervention.</p> <p>Conclusions: A multi-component weight loss intervention can be equally effective for adults with and without ID and obesity.</p&gt

    Perceptions of hypertension treatment among patients with and without diabetes

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Despite the availability of a wide selection of effective antihypertensive treatments and the existence of clear treatment guidelines, many patients with hypertension do not have controlled blood pressure. We conducted a qualitative study to explore beliefs and perceptions regarding hypertension and gain an understanding of barriers to treatment among patients with and without diabetes.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Ten focus groups were held for patients with hypertension in three age ranges, with and without diabetes. The topic guides for the groups were: What will determine your future health status? What do you understand by "raised blood pressure"? How should one go about treating raised blood pressure?</p> <p>Results</p> <p>People with hypertension tend to see hypertension not as a disease but as a risk factor for myocardial infarction or stroke. They do not view it as a continuous, degenerative process of damage to the vascular system, but rather as a binary risk process, within which you can either be a winner (not become ill) or a loser. This makes non-adherence to treatment a gamble with a potential positive outcome. Patients with diabetes are more likely to accept hypertension as a chronic illness with minor impact on their routine, and less important than their diabetes. Most participants overestimated the effect of stress as a causative factor believing that a reduction in levels of stress is the most important treatment modality. Many believe they "know their bodies" and are able to control their blood pressure. Patients without diabetes were most likely to adopt a treatment which is a compromise between their physician's suggestions and their own understanding of hypertension.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Patient denial and non-adherence to hypertension treatment is a prevalent phenomenon reflecting a conscious choice made by the patient, based on his knowledge and perceptions regarding the medical condition and its treatment. There is a need to change perception of hypertension from a gamble to a disease process. Changing the message from the existing one of "silent killer" to one that depicts hypertension as a manageable disease process may have the potential to significantly increase adherence rates.</p

    Sodium and potassium intakes among US adults: NHANES 2003–2008

    Get PDF
    Background: The American Heart Association (AHA), Institute of Medicine (IOM), and US Departments of Health and Human Services and Agriculture (USDA) Dietary Guidelines for Americans all recommend that Americans limit sodium intake and choose foods that contain potassium to decrease the risk of hypertension and other adverse health outcomes. Objective: We estimated the distributions of usual daily sodium and potassium intakes by sociodemographic and health characteristics relative to current recommendations. Design: We used 24-h dietary recalls and other data from 12,581 adults aged 20ywhoparticipatedinNHANESin20032008.Estimatesofsodiumandpotassiumintakeswereadjustedforwithinindividualdaytodayvariationbyusingmeasurementerrormodels.SEsand9520 y who participated in NHANES in 2003–2008. Estimates of sodium and potassium intakes were adjusted for withinindividual day-to-day variation by using measurement error models. SEs and 95% CIs were assessed by using jackknife replicate weights. Results: Overall, 99.4% (95% CI: 99.3%, 99.5%) of US adults consumed more sodium daily than recommended by the AHA (,1500 mg), and 90.7% (89.6%, 91.8%) consumed more than the IOM Tolerable Upper Intake Level (2300 mg). In US adults who are recommended by the Dietary Guidelines to further reduce sodium intake to 1500 mg/d (ie, African Americans aged 51 y or persons with hypertension, diabetes, or chronic kidney disease), 98.8% (98.4%, 99.2%) overall consumed .1500 mg/d, and 60.4% consumed .3000 mg/d—more than double the recommendation. Overall, ,2% of US adults and w5% of US men consumed $4700 mg K/d (ie, met recommendations for potassium). Conclusion: Regardless of recommendations or sociodemographic or health characteristics, the vast majority of US adults consume too much sodium and too little potassium

    Weight management interventions in adults with intellectual disabilities and obesity: a systematic review of the evidence

    Get PDF
    o evaluate the clinical effectiveness of weight management interventions in adults with intellectual disabilities (ID) and obesity using recommendations from current clinical guidelines for the first line management of obesity in adults. Full papers on lifestyle modification interventions published between 1982 to 2011 were sought by searching the Medline, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL databases. Studies were evaluated based on 1) intervention components, 2) methodology, 3) attrition rate 4) reported weight loss and 5) duration of follow up. Twenty two studies met the inclusion criteria. The interventions were classified according to inclusion of the following components: behaviour change alone, behaviour change plus physical activity, dietary advice or physical activity alone, dietary plus physical activity advice and multi-component (all three components). The majority of the studies had the same methodological limitations: no sample size justification, small heterogeneous samples, no information on randomisation methodologies. Eight studies were classified as multi-component interventions, of which one study used a 600 kilocalorie (2510 kilojoule) daily energy deficit diet. Study durations were mostly below the duration recommended in clinical guidelines and varied widely. No study included an exercise program promoting 225–300 minutes or more of moderate intensity physical activity per week but the majority of the studies used the same behaviour change techniques. Three studies reported clinically significant weight loss (&#8805; 5%) at six months post intervention. Current data indicate weight management interventions in those with ID differ from recommended practice and further studies to examine the effectiveness of multi-component weight management interventions for adults with ID and obesity are justified

    Autologous chondrocyte implantation in the knee : systematic review and economic evaluation

    Get PDF
    Background: The surfaces of the bones in the knee are covered with articular cartilage, a rubber-like substance that is very smooth, allowing frictionless movement in the joint and acting as a shock absorber. The cells that form the cartilage are called chondrocytes. Natural cartilage is called hyaline cartilage. Articular cartilage has very little capacity for self-repair, so damage may be permanent. Various methods have been used to try to repair cartilage. Autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) involves laboratory culture of cartilage-producing cells from the knee and then implanting them into the chondral defect. Objective: To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of ACI in chondral defects in the knee, compared with microfracture (MF). Data sources: A broad search was done in MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, NHS Economic Evaluation Database and Web of Science, for studies published since the last Health Technology Assessment review. Review methods: Systematic review of recent reviews, trials, long-term observational studies and economic evaluations of the use of ACI and MF for repairing symptomatic articular cartilage defects of the knee. A new economic model was constructed. Submissions from two manufacturers and the ACTIVE (Autologous Chondrocyte Transplantation/Implantation Versus Existing Treatment) trial group were reviewed. Survival analysis was based on long-term observational studies. Results: Four randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published since the last appraisal provided evidence on the efficacy of ACI. The SUMMIT (Superiority of Matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte implant versus Microfracture for Treatment of symptomatic articular cartilage defects) trial compared matrix-applied chondrocyte implantation (MACI®) against MF. The TIG/ACT/01/2000 (TIG/ACT) trial compared ACI with characterised chondrocytes against MF. The ACTIVE trial compared several forms of ACI against standard treatments, mainly MF. In the SUMMIT trial, improvements in knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome scores (KOOSs), and the proportion of responders, were greater in the MACI group than in the MF group. In the TIG/ACT trial there was improvement in the KOOS at 60 months, but no difference between ACI and MF overall. Patients with onset of symptoms < 3 years’ duration did better with ACI. Results from ACTIVE have not yet been published. Survival analysis suggests that long-term results are better with ACI than with MF. Economic modelling suggested that ACI was cost-effective compared with MF across a range of scenarios. Limitations: The main limitation is the lack of RCT data beyond 5 years of follow-up. A second is that the techniques of ACI are evolving, so long-term data come from trials using forms of ACI that are now superseded. In the modelling, we therefore assumed that durability of cartilage repair as seen in studies of older forms of ACI could be applied in modelling of newer forms. A third is that the high list prices of chondrocytes are reduced by confidential discounting. The main research needs are for longer-term follow-up and for trials of the next generation of ACI. Conclusions: The evidence base for ACI has improved since the last appraisal by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. In most analyses, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for ACI compared with MF appear to be within a range usually considered acceptable. Research is needed into long-term results of new forms of ACI

    Autologous chondrocyte implantation in the knee: systematic review and economic evaluation

    Full text link
    corecore