Melissa H Laitner1, Samantha A Minski2, Michael G Perri3. 1. University of Florida, Department of Clinical and Health Psychology, P.O. Box 100165, Gainesville, FL 32610, United States. Electronic address: laitner@phhp.ufl.edu. 2. University of Florida, Department of Clinical and Health Psychology, P.O. Box 100165, Gainesville, FL 32610, United States. Electronic address: sminski@phhp.ufl.edu. 3. University of Florida, Department of Clinical and Health Psychology, P.O. Box 100165, Gainesville, FL 32610, United States. Electronic address: mperri@phhp.ufl.edu.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Self-monitoring has been shown to be a crucial part of initial weight loss success in behavioral interventions. However, little is known about the impact of self-monitoring during the period following initial treatment. METHODS: The current study examined the role of self-monitoring on weight loss during an initial 6-month intervention period (Phase 1) and a 12-month extended care period (Phase 2) in a group of 167 obese women (M±SD: BMI=37.0±5.1kg/m(2), age=59.9±6.2years) enrolled in a behavioral weight loss program. RESULTS: Cluster analysis identified three groups of participants with low, moderate, and high rates of weight loss success during Phase 1 and Phase 2. A one-way ANOVA revealed no significant differences in self-monitoring frequency between groups during Phase 1 (p=.645), but significant differences between all three groups during Phase 2 (p=.001). High success participants completed the most self-monitoring records, followed by the moderate group. The low success group completed the least number of records. Furthermore, self-monitoring during Phase 2 significantly mediated the relationship between extended-care session attendance and percent weight change during that time (95% CI [-.004, -.001], p<.001). CONCLUSION: These results highlight the importance of continuing self-monitoring after the initial phase of treatment to maintain lost weight.
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION: Self-monitoring has been shown to be a crucial part of initial weight loss success in behavioral interventions. However, little is known about the impact of self-monitoring during the period following initial treatment. METHODS: The current study examined the role of self-monitoring on weight loss during an initial 6-month intervention period (Phase 1) and a 12-month extended care period (Phase 2) in a group of 167 obesewomen (M±SD: BMI=37.0±5.1kg/m(2), age=59.9±6.2years) enrolled in a behavioral weight loss program. RESULTS: Cluster analysis identified three groups of participants with low, moderate, and high rates of weight loss success during Phase 1 and Phase 2. A one-way ANOVA revealed no significant differences in self-monitoring frequency between groups during Phase 1 (p=.645), but significant differences between all three groups during Phase 2 (p=.001). High success participants completed the most self-monitoring records, followed by the moderate group. The low success group completed the least number of records. Furthermore, self-monitoring during Phase 2 significantly mediated the relationship between extended-care session attendance and percent weight change during that time (95% CI [-.004, -.001], p<.001). CONCLUSION: These results highlight the importance of continuing self-monitoring after the initial phase of treatment to maintain lost weight.
Authors: Lora E Burke; Susan M Sereika; Edvin Music; Melanie Warziski; Mindi A Styn; Arthur Stone Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2007-07-25 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Michael D Jensen; Donna H Ryan; Caroline M Apovian; Jamy D Ard; Anthony G Comuzzie; Karen A Donato; Frank B Hu; Van S Hubbard; John M Jakicic; Robert F Kushner; Catherine M Loria; Barbara E Millen; Cathy A Nonas; F Xavier Pi-Sunyer; June Stevens; Victor J Stevens; Thomas A Wadden; Bruce M Wolfe; Susan Z Yanovski; Harmon S Jordan; Karima A Kendall; Linda J Lux; Roycelynn Mentor-Marcel; Laura C Morgan; Michael G Trisolini; Janusz Wnek; Jeffrey L Anderson; Jonathan L Halperin; Nancy M Albert; Biykem Bozkurt; Ralph G Brindis; Lesley H Curtis; David DeMets; Judith S Hochman; Richard J Kovacs; E Magnus Ohman; Susan J Pressler; Frank W Sellke; Win-Kuang Shen; Sidney C Smith; Gordon F Tomaselli Journal: Circulation Date: 2013-11-12 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Michael G Perri; Marian C Limacher; Patricia E Durning; David M Janicke; Lesley D Lutes; Linda B Bobroff; Martha Sue Dale; Michael J Daniels; Tiffany A Radcliff; A Daniel Martin Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2008-11-24
Authors: Viktoria L Gloy; Matthias Briel; Deepak L Bhatt; Sangeeta R Kashyap; Philip R Schauer; Geltrude Mingrone; Heiner C Bucher; Alain J Nordmann Journal: BMJ Date: 2013-10-22
Authors: Jena S Tronieri; Anthony N Fabricatore; Thomas A Wadden; Pernille Auerbach; Lars Endahl; Danny Sugimoto; Domenica Rubino Journal: Obes Facts Date: 2020-11-16 Impact factor: 3.942
Authors: Dalia S Mikhail; Teresa B Jensen; Todd W Wade; Jane F Myers; Jennifer M Frank; Mark Wieland; Don Hensrud; M Molly McMahon; Maria L Collazo-Clavell; Haitham Abu-Lebdeh; Kurt A Kennel; Daniel L Hurley; Karen Grothe; Michael D Jensen Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Commun Date: 2018-03-09
Authors: Amy A Gorin; Theodore A Powers; Katelyn Gettens; Talea Cornelius; Richard Koestner; Amy R Mobley; Linda Pescatello; Tania Huedo Medina Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2017-09-29 Impact factor: 3.295