探索针对超重和肥胖成年人的自我称重体重增加预防干预措施的潜在覆盖范围和代表性。

IF 2.2 Q3 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Clinical Obesity Pub Date : 2024-02-01 DOI:10.1111/cob.12641
Kellie B. Scotti, Melinda Rajoria, Montserrat Carrera Seoane, Kathryn M. Ross, Sofia Muenyi, Megan A. McVay
{"title":"探索针对超重和肥胖成年人的自我称重体重增加预防干预措施的潜在覆盖范围和代表性。","authors":"Kellie B. Scotti,&nbsp;Melinda Rajoria,&nbsp;Montserrat Carrera Seoane,&nbsp;Kathryn M. Ross,&nbsp;Sofia Muenyi,&nbsp;Megan A. McVay","doi":"10.1111/cob.12641","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Most adults with obesity do not enrol in comprehensive weight loss interventions when offered. For these individuals, lower burden self-weighing interventions may offer an acceptable alternative, though data is lacking on the potential for reach and representativeness of such interventions. Health system patients with BMI ≥30 kg/m<sup>2</sup> (or 25–30 kg/m<sup>2</sup> with an obesity comorbidity) completed a general health survey. During the survey, patients were given information about comprehensive weight loss interventions. If they denied interest or did not enrol in a comprehensive intervention, they were offered enrolment in a low-burden weight gain prevention intervention focused on daily self-weighing using a cellular network-connected in-home scale without any dietary or physical activity prescriptions. Enrolment in this program was documented. Among patients offered the self-weighing intervention (<i>n</i> = 85; 55.3% men; 58.8% White; BMI = 34.2 kg/m<sup>2</sup>), 44.2% enrolled. Compared to those who did not enrol, enrollers had higher educational attainment (57.1% vs. 42.9% with bachelor's degree <i>p</i> = .02), social anxiety (5.8 vs. 2.8, <i>p</i> &lt; .001), and perceptions of the effectiveness of the self-weighing intervention (25.8 vs. 20.9 on 35, <i>p</i> = .007). The most highly endorsed reason for not enrolling in the self-weighing intervention was that it would make individuals overly focused on weight. A low-intensity weight gain prevention intervention may serve as a viable alternative to comprehensive weight loss interventions for the substantial portion of patients who are at risk for continued weight gain but would otherwise not enrol in a comprehensive intervention. Differential enrolment by education, however, suggests potential for inequitable uptake.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":10399,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Obesity","volume":"14 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploring potential reach and representativeness of a self-weighing weight gain prevention intervention in adults with overweight and obesity\",\"authors\":\"Kellie B. Scotti,&nbsp;Melinda Rajoria,&nbsp;Montserrat Carrera Seoane,&nbsp;Kathryn M. Ross,&nbsp;Sofia Muenyi,&nbsp;Megan A. McVay\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/cob.12641\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <p>Most adults with obesity do not enrol in comprehensive weight loss interventions when offered. For these individuals, lower burden self-weighing interventions may offer an acceptable alternative, though data is lacking on the potential for reach and representativeness of such interventions. Health system patients with BMI ≥30 kg/m<sup>2</sup> (or 25–30 kg/m<sup>2</sup> with an obesity comorbidity) completed a general health survey. During the survey, patients were given information about comprehensive weight loss interventions. If they denied interest or did not enrol in a comprehensive intervention, they were offered enrolment in a low-burden weight gain prevention intervention focused on daily self-weighing using a cellular network-connected in-home scale without any dietary or physical activity prescriptions. Enrolment in this program was documented. Among patients offered the self-weighing intervention (<i>n</i> = 85; 55.3% men; 58.8% White; BMI = 34.2 kg/m<sup>2</sup>), 44.2% enrolled. Compared to those who did not enrol, enrollers had higher educational attainment (57.1% vs. 42.9% with bachelor's degree <i>p</i> = .02), social anxiety (5.8 vs. 2.8, <i>p</i> &lt; .001), and perceptions of the effectiveness of the self-weighing intervention (25.8 vs. 20.9 on 35, <i>p</i> = .007). The most highly endorsed reason for not enrolling in the self-weighing intervention was that it would make individuals overly focused on weight. A low-intensity weight gain prevention intervention may serve as a viable alternative to comprehensive weight loss interventions for the substantial portion of patients who are at risk for continued weight gain but would otherwise not enrol in a comprehensive intervention. Differential enrolment by education, however, suggests potential for inequitable uptake.</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10399,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Obesity\",\"volume\":\"14 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Obesity\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cob.12641\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Obesity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cob.12641","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

大多数成人肥胖症患者在接受全面的减肥干预时都不会参加。对于这些人来说,负担较轻的自我称重干预可能是一种可接受的替代方法,尽管目前还缺乏有关此类干预的潜在覆盖面和代表性的数据。体重指数≥30 kg/m2(或 25-30 kg/m2,合并肥胖症)的医疗系统患者完成了一项一般健康调查。在调查过程中,患者获得了有关综合减肥干预措施的信息。如果他们否认有兴趣或没有报名参加综合干预措施,则向他们提供报名参加低负担体重增加预防干预措施的机会,该干预措施侧重于每天使用与蜂窝网络连接的家用体重计进行自我称重,而不提供任何饮食或体育锻炼处方。该计划的报名情况已记录在案。在接受自我称重干预的患者中(n = 85;55.3% 为男性;58.8% 为白人;BMI = 34.2 kg/m2),有 44.2% 的人报名参加。与未报名者相比,报名者受教育程度更高(57.1% 对 42.9%,有学士学位 p = .02),社交焦虑程度更高(5.8 对 2.8,p = .02),体重增加更快(5.8 对 2.8,p = .02)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Exploring potential reach and representativeness of a self-weighing weight gain prevention intervention in adults with overweight and obesity

Most adults with obesity do not enrol in comprehensive weight loss interventions when offered. For these individuals, lower burden self-weighing interventions may offer an acceptable alternative, though data is lacking on the potential for reach and representativeness of such interventions. Health system patients with BMI ≥30 kg/m2 (or 25–30 kg/m2 with an obesity comorbidity) completed a general health survey. During the survey, patients were given information about comprehensive weight loss interventions. If they denied interest or did not enrol in a comprehensive intervention, they were offered enrolment in a low-burden weight gain prevention intervention focused on daily self-weighing using a cellular network-connected in-home scale without any dietary or physical activity prescriptions. Enrolment in this program was documented. Among patients offered the self-weighing intervention (n = 85; 55.3% men; 58.8% White; BMI = 34.2 kg/m2), 44.2% enrolled. Compared to those who did not enrol, enrollers had higher educational attainment (57.1% vs. 42.9% with bachelor's degree p = .02), social anxiety (5.8 vs. 2.8, p < .001), and perceptions of the effectiveness of the self-weighing intervention (25.8 vs. 20.9 on 35, p = .007). The most highly endorsed reason for not enrolling in the self-weighing intervention was that it would make individuals overly focused on weight. A low-intensity weight gain prevention intervention may serve as a viable alternative to comprehensive weight loss interventions for the substantial portion of patients who are at risk for continued weight gain but would otherwise not enrol in a comprehensive intervention. Differential enrolment by education, however, suggests potential for inequitable uptake.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Obesity
Clinical Obesity ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM-
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
3.00%
发文量
59
期刊介绍: Clinical Obesity is an international peer-reviewed journal publishing high quality translational and clinical research papers and reviews focussing on obesity and its co-morbidities. Key areas of interest are: • Patient assessment, classification, diagnosis and prognosis • Drug treatments, clinical trials and supporting research • Bariatric surgery and follow-up issues • Surgical approaches to remove body fat • Pharmacological, dietary and behavioural approaches for weight loss • Clinical physiology • Clinically relevant epidemiology • Psychological aspects of obesity • Co-morbidities • Nursing and care of patients with obesity.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信