PURPOSE: To examine the impact of a small-changes weight loss program across a 3-month intervention followed by a 6-month follow-up program. DESIGN: A one-group pre-post intervention study. SETTING:Medium-sized Southwestern university. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-five obese adult women (mean body mass index [BMI] = 31.8 kg/m(2), standard deviation [SD] = 4.9). INTERVENTION: Participants were asked to choose and adopt small changes in their diet and physical activity relative to baseline during weekly group-based meetings over 3 months. Participants then received bi-weekly phone calls across a 6-month follow-up period. MEASURES: Weight change was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included waist circumference, daily step count, and caloric intake. ANALYSES: Intention-to-treat analysis of change from baseline and completers-only analysis (n = 22) for secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Participants achieved clinically significant weight loss (mean [M] = -3.2 kg, standard error [SE] = .47 kg, p < .001) across the initial small changes treatment program. Moreover, participants continued to lose weight across the 6-month phone-based follow-up program (M = -2.1 kg, SE = .83 kg, p < .017), totaling >5% weight loss across the 9-month program (M = 5.3 kg, SE = 1.1 kg, p < .001). CONCLUSION: Using a small changes approach, participants achieved weight loss in an initial group-based program, which continued with minimal phone-based follow-up. Larger randomized studies comparing a small changes approach to traditional obesity treatment are warranted.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To examine the impact of a small-changes weight loss program across a 3-month intervention followed by a 6-month follow-up program. DESIGN: A one-group pre-post intervention study. SETTING: Medium-sized Southwestern university. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-five obese adult women (mean body mass index [BMI] = 31.8 kg/m(2), standard deviation [SD] = 4.9). INTERVENTION: Participants were asked to choose and adopt small changes in their diet and physical activity relative to baseline during weekly group-based meetings over 3 months. Participants then received bi-weekly phone calls across a 6-month follow-up period. MEASURES: Weight change was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included waist circumference, daily step count, and caloric intake. ANALYSES: Intention-to-treat analysis of change from baseline and completers-only analysis (n = 22) for secondary outcomes. RESULTS:Participants achieved clinically significant weight loss (mean [M] = -3.2 kg, standard error [SE] = .47 kg, p < .001) across the initial small changes treatment program. Moreover, participants continued to lose weight across the 6-month phone-based follow-up program (M = -2.1 kg, SE = .83 kg, p < .017), totaling >5% weight loss across the 9-month program (M = 5.3 kg, SE = 1.1 kg, p < .001). CONCLUSION: Using a small changes approach, participants achieved weight loss in an initial group-based program, which continued with minimal phone-based follow-up. Larger randomized studies comparing a small changes approach to traditional obesity treatment are warranted.
Authors: Laura J Damschroder; David E Goodrich; Hyungjin Myra Kim; Robert Holleman; Leah Gillon; Susan Kirsh; Caroline R Richardson; Lesley D Lutes Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2016-09 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: Lesley D Lutes; Laura J Damschroder; Robin Masheb; Hyungjin Myra Kim; Leah Gillon; Robert G Holleman; David E Goodrich; Julie C Lowery; Carol Janney; Susan Kirsh; Caroline R Richardson Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2017-04 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Rena R Wing; Deborah F Tate; Mark A Espeland; Cora E Lewis; Jessica Gokee LaRose; Amy A Gorin; Judy Bahnson; Letitia H Perdue; Karen E Hatley; Erica Ferguson; Katelyn R Garcia; Wei Lang Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2016-06-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Johanna D Eldridge; Carol M Devine; Elaine Wethington; Luz Aceves; Erica Phillips-Caesar; Brian Wansink; Mary E Charlson Journal: Appetite Date: 2015-09-12 Impact factor: 3.868
Authors: A Blair Irvine; Vicky A Gelatt; John R Seeley; Pamela Macfarlane; Jeff M Gau Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2013-02-05 Impact factor: 5.428