首页> 外文期刊>American Family Physician >Which weight-loss programs are most effective?
【24h】

Which weight-loss programs are most effective?

机译:哪些减肥计划最有效?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Background: The World Health Organization defines obesity as a body mass index of 30 kg per m2 or greater, which puts almost 25 percent of the population of England in that category. Because obesity is associated with several chronic medical conditions, primary care physicians are charged with diagnosing obesity and offering clinical treatment, or recommending a commercial weight-management program. It is unclear, however, which approach or available commercial program is most effective for weight loss. Previous studies indicate that access to prolonged treatment plans (up to two years) yields greater weight loss compared with a control group, but most patients do not have access to long-term weight-management treatment. Jolly and colleagues compared the effectiveness of short-term programs for weight loss, including several commercial programs and primary care management, with a minimal-intervention control group. The Study: Patients with obesity were recruited from 17 general practices in a regional National Health Service Trust in Great Britain. Pregnant women and those unable to understand English were excluded. Participants were randomized to one of eight groups. Three groups were assigned to commercially available weight-loss programs: Weight Watchers, Slimming World, and Rosemary Conley. Another three groups were assigned to programs provided by the National Health Service: a group weight-loss program (Size Down), one-on-one weight-loss counseling with a primary care nurse, and one-on-one weight-loss counseling with a pharmacist. Participants in the seventh group could choose which plan to participate in. Those in the eighth group (i.e., the control group) were given vouchers for 12 visits to a local gym, but did not receive any specific nutrition or weight-loss advice. Baseline weights and heights were collected at participants' first visit to their assigned program. The primary outcome was weight loss at three months, with secondary outcomes of self-reported physical activity, weight loss at one year, and percentage weight loss at three months and at one year. Weight was recorded at the final visit for those who participated throughout the entire program; weights were collected in the office or by self-report for those who did not complete the 12-week program. At the one-year assessment, participants were interviewed about their impressions of the program to which they had been assigned and whether they had tried any other weight-loss programs over the year. Results: To detect a 2-kg (4.44-lb) weight loss at three months with adequate power, 100 people were randomized to each of the three commercial program groups, the Slim Down group, the free-choice group, and control group. Because of limited availability, only 70 participants were randomized to the primary care and pharmacy groups. The 2-kg difference was selected because it was achievable in 12 weeks and contributed to a clinically meaningful 5 percent weight loss. Although all groups lost some weight at three months, only participants in the Weight Watchers and Rosemary Conley groups had significantly greater weight loss and percentage weight loss than the control group (2.41 kg [5.36 lb] and 2.22 kg [4.93 lb], respectively). The least effective strategy was counseling provided by a primary care nurse. At one year, only participants in the Weight Watchers group had statistically significant weight loss compared with the control group (2.38 kg [5.29 lb]). Respondents who reported using the same weight-loss techniques they learned in the three-month study period throughout the year lost a small amount of weight at one year (0.57 kg [1.27 lb]), whereas those who changed to another method or stopped trying to lose weight gained weight at one year (1.18 kg [2.62 lb]). There was no difference in weight loss between participants randomized to a particular plan and those who were allowed to select a program. Conclusion: In patients with obesity in a primary care
机译:背景:世界卫生组织将肥胖定义为每平方米30公斤或更大的体重指数,这使英格兰几乎25%的人口属于这一类别。由于肥胖症与几种慢性病有关,因此初级保健医师应负责诊断肥胖症并提供临床治疗或推荐商业体重管理计划。但是,目前尚不清楚哪种方法或可用的商业程序对减肥最有效。先前的研究表明,与对照组相比,延长治疗计划(长达两年)的体重减轻更大,但是大多数患者无法获得长期的体重管理治疗。 Jolly及其同事将短期减肥计划的效果(包括多个商业计划和初级保健管理)与最低干预对照组进行了比较。研究:肥胖患者是从英国地区国家卫生服务基金会的17种常规实践中招募的。孕妇和不懂英语的人被排除在外。参与者被随机分为八组之一。三个小组被分配到可商购的减肥计划中:Weight Watchers,Slimming World和Rosemary Conley。另外三组被分配到国家卫生局提供的计划中:一个小组减肥计划(缩小尺寸),与初级保健护士进行一对一的减肥咨询以及一对一的减肥咨询与药剂师。第七组的参与者可以选择参加哪个计划。第八组(即对照组)的参与者获得了抵用当地体育馆12次的优惠券,但没有收到任何具体的营养或减肥建议。在参与者首次访问其分配的程序时收集基线体重和身高。主要结果是三个月时体重减轻,其次是自我报告的体育锻炼,一年时体重减轻以及三个月和一年时体重减轻百分比。最终访问期间记录了参与整个计划的人员的体重;对于未完成12周计划的人员,在办公室或通过自我报告收集体重。在为期一年的评估中,对参与者进行了访谈,了解他们对分配给该计划的印象以及一年中是否尝试过其他减肥计划。结果:为了在三个月内以足够的力量检测到2公斤(4.44磅)的体重减轻,将100个人随机分配到三个商业计划组(瘦身组,自由选择组和对照组)中的每一个。由于可用性有限,只有70名参与者被随机分配到初级保健和药学组。选择2公斤的差异是因为它在12周内即可达到,并且在临床上可减轻5%的体重。尽管所有组在三个月时都减轻了一些体重,但只有“体重观察者”组和“迷迭香康利”组的参与者的体重减轻和百分比消瘦明显高于对照组(分别为2.41千克[5.36磅]和2.22千克[4.93磅]) 。最无效的策略是由初级护理护士提供咨询。一年后,只有体重观察者组的参与者与对照组(2.38千克[5.29磅])相比,具有统计学上显着的体重减轻。报告称使用一年中在为期三个月的研究期内使用的相同减肥技术的被调查者,一年损失了少量体重(0.57千克[1.27磅]),而那些改用另一种方法或停止尝试的人减肥一年后增加体重(1.18千克[2.62磅])。随机分配到特定计划的参与者与被允许选择程序的参与者之间的体重减轻没有区别。结论:在肥胖患者中进行初级保健

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号