BACKGROUND: Stepped-care approaches to weight loss have shown some success among adults. A 'stepped-down' version of the stepped-care approach to adolescent weight loss has never been evaluated. OBJECTIVES: We conducted a one-year randomized controlled trial to compare a stepped-down weight loss intervention versus enhanced usual care (EUC). METHODS:Study participants were obese adolescents age 11-13 (N = 106, 51% girls, and 82% Hispanic) recruited from primary care clinics in San Diego, California. The stepped-down intervention was delivered through clinician and health educator counseling (in-person and by phone) and mailed content. The intervention consisted of four-month 'steps' beginning with the most intensive contact followed by reduced contact if treatment goals were met. The EUC group received an initial physician visit, one session with a health counselor, and monthly mailed materials. Body mass index (BMI kg/m(2) ) was measured at baseline, 4, 8, and 12 months. Mixed-model regression analyses were stratified by sex. RESULTS: Results indicated a clinically significant treatment effect for boys on BMI (p < 0.001) but not girls. No between group differences were found for adiposity and biometric outcomes. Only 13% of intervention participants succeeded in stepping down from step 1 to step 2 or step 3. CONCLUSIONS: A stepped-down approach to weight loss showed some evidence of efficacy for weight loss in boys but not girls. The findings suggest the program as designed was not intensive enough to result in weight loss in this population segment.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Stepped-care approaches to weight loss have shown some success among adults. A 'stepped-down' version of the stepped-care approach to adolescent weight loss has never been evaluated. OBJECTIVES: We conducted a one-year randomized controlled trial to compare a stepped-down weight loss intervention versus enhanced usual care (EUC). METHODS: Study participants were obese adolescents age 11-13 (N = 106, 51% girls, and 82% Hispanic) recruited from primary care clinics in San Diego, California. The stepped-down intervention was delivered through clinician and health educator counseling (in-person and by phone) and mailed content. The intervention consisted of four-month 'steps' beginning with the most intensive contact followed by reduced contact if treatment goals were met. The EUC group received an initial physician visit, one session with a health counselor, and monthly mailed materials. Body mass index (BMI kg/m(2) ) was measured at baseline, 4, 8, and 12 months. Mixed-model regression analyses were stratified by sex. RESULTS: Results indicated a clinically significant treatment effect for boys on BMI (p < 0.001) but not girls. No between group differences were found for adiposity and biometric outcomes. Only 13% of intervention participants succeeded in stepping down from step 1 to step 2 or step 3. CONCLUSIONS: A stepped-down approach to weight loss showed some evidence of efficacy for weight loss in boys but not girls. The findings suggest the program as designed was not intensive enough to result in weight loss in this population segment.
Authors: Denise E Wilfley; Tiffany L Tibbs; Dorothy J Van Buren; Kelle P Reach; Mark S Walker; Leonard H Epstein Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2007-09 Impact factor: 4.267
Authors: Heather Kitzman-Ulrich; Dawn K Wilson; Sara M St George; Hannah Lawman; Michelle Segal; Amanda Fairchild Journal: Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev Date: 2010-09
Authors: Jeannie S Huang; Gregory J Norman; Marion F Zabinski; Karen Calfas; Kevin Patrick Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2007-01-05 Impact factor: 5.012
Authors: Evelyn P Whitlock; Elizabeth A O'Connor; Selvi B Williams; Tracy L Beil; Kevin W Lutz Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2010-01-18 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Shirley M Moore; Elaine A Borawski; Thomas E Love; Sarah Jones; Terri Casey; Sarah McAleer; Charles Thomas; Clara Adegbite-Adeniyi; Naveen K Uli; Heather K Hardin; Erika S Trapl; Matthew Plow; June Stevens; Kimberly P Truesdale; Charlotte A Pratt; Michael Long; Ann Nevar Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2019-06 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Elissa Jelalian; E Whitney Evans; Diana Rancourt; Lisa Ranzenhofer; Neta Taylor; Chantelle Hart; Ronald Seifer; Kelly Klinepier; Gary D Foster Journal: Child Obes Date: 2019-12-18 Impact factor: 2.992
Authors: Jie Liu; Job G Godino; Gregory J Norman; Linda Hill; Karen Calfas; James F Sallis; Elva Arredondo; Cheryl L Rock; Michael Criqui; Shu-Hong Zhu; Kenneth Griffiths; Jennifer Covin; Lindsay Dillon; Kevin Patrick Journal: Prev Med Date: 2018-07-25 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Gregory J Norman; Jordan A Carlson; Kevin Patrick; Julia K Kolodziejczyk; Job G Godino; Jeannie Huang; John Thyfault Journal: Child Obes Date: 2017-06-02 Impact factor: 2.992
Authors: Ken Resnicow; Donna Harris; Richard Wasserman; Robert P Schwartz; Veronica Perez-Rosas; Rada Mihalcea; Linda Snetselaar Journal: Pediatr Clin North Am Date: 2016-06 Impact factor: 3.278
Authors: Lauren A Fowler; Anne Claire Grammer; Amanda E Staiano; Ellen E Fitzsimmons-Craft; Ling Chen; Lauren H Yaeger; Denise E Wilfley Journal: Int J Obes (Lond) Date: 2021-02-24 Impact factor: 5.095
Authors: Lena Al-Khudairy; Emma Loveman; Jill L Colquitt; Emma Mead; Rebecca E Johnson; Hannah Fraser; Joan Olajide; Marie Murphy; Rochelle Marian Velho; Claire O'Malley; Liane B Azevedo; Louisa J Ells; Maria-Inti Metzendorf; Karen Rees Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2017-06-22
Authors: Jonathan McGavock; Bhupendrasinh F Chauhan; Rasheda Rabbani; Sofia Dias; Nika Klaprat; Sara Boissoneault; Justin Lys; Aleksandra K Wierzbowski; Mohammad Nazmus Sakib; Ryan Zarychanski; Ahmed M Abou-Setta Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2020-07-01