| Literature DB >> 30631593 |
Victoria Sandercock1, Jeanette Andrade2.
Abstract
Background: Adult obesity is globally recognized as a public health concern. As adults spend most of their weekdays at work, worksite wellness programs may include topics of nutrition education and physical activity to improve an employee's body composition. However, results are inconsistent with the impact they have on employees' body composition. Objective: The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate worksite wellness nutrition and physical activity programs and their subsequent impact on participants' body composition.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30631593 PMCID: PMC6304910 DOI: 10.1155/2018/1035871
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Obes ISSN: 2090-0708
Summary of articles included within the systematic review (n=23).
| Author (year) | Location | Design/duration | Population/groups | Theory/wellness intervention | Evaluation measures | Measurement techniques | Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Allen et al. (2012) [ | USA | RCT1,12 months | Total | No specific theory | BMI2, BF%3, WC4 | Weight: calibrated electronic scale | Intervention: insignificant decrease in BMI, BF%, or WC ( |
|
| |||||||
| Almeida et al. (2015) [ | USA | RCT,12 months | Total | No specific theory | BW6, BMI | Weight: calibrated electronic scale | Intervention: BW and BMI decreased ( |
|
| |||||||
| Baker Parker et al. (2010) [ | USA | Quasi-experimental: 3 groups, 24 months | Total | No specific theory | BMI | Weight and height were measured, but no further specifications | An insignificant decrease in BMI ( |
|
| |||||||
| Barham et al. (2011) [ | USA | RCT,12 months | Total | No specific theory | BMI, WC | Weight: calibrated electronic scale | Intervention: decreased BMI ( |
|
| |||||||
| Campbell et al. (2002) [ | USA | RCT,18 months | Total | Social cognitive theory, Stages of Change Trans-Theoretical framework, social support model | BMI | Weight: calibrated scale | No changes in BMI |
|
| |||||||
| Christensen et al. (2012) [ | Denmark | RCT,12 months | Total | Cognitive behavioral training | BW, BMI, BF% | Weight: calibrated scale. Measurements taken without socks and shoes, light clothing, 1 kg subtracted to compensate for clothing. | Intervention: BW decreased by 6 kg ( |
|
| |||||||
| Fernandez et al. (2015) [ | USA | RCT: 10 groups,24 months | Total | No specific theory | BMI | Weight: calibrated electronic scale | Intervention: BMI decreased by 0.54 kg/m2 ( |
| French et al. (2010) [ | USA | RCT, | Total | No specific theory | BMI | Weight: calibrated electronic scale | Intervention: BMI decreased by −0.14 kg/m2 ( |
|
| |||||||
| Goetzel et al. (2014) [ | USA | 1 cohort group, | Total | No specific theory | BMI | Self-reported weight and height | BMI decreased by 2.0 kg/m2 ( |
|
| |||||||
| Hochart et al. (2011) [ | USA | Pretest, posttest: 13 groups, | Total | No specific theory | BW, BMI | Weight and height measured, but no specifications on how these measurement techniques were taken | Intervention: Insignificant decreases in BW and BMI ( |
|
| |||||||
| LeCheminant et al. (2012) [ | USA | 1 cohort group | Total | Behavioral change framework | BMI | Weight and height measured, but no specifications on how these measurement techniques were taken | BMI increased ( |
|
| |||||||
| Lemon et al. (2014) [ | USA | RCT, | Total | Social ecological model | BMI | Weight: calibrated electronic scale. Measured by trained staff, readings to the nearest 2/10th pound | Decreased BMI -0.48 kg/m2 ( |
|
| |||||||
| Leyk et al. (2014) [ | Germany | Pretest, posttest: 3 groups, | Total | No specific theory | BW, BMI, BF%, WC | Weight: calibrated electronic scale | Decrease in BW ( |
|
| |||||||
| Linde et al. (2012) [ | USA | RCT, | Total | No specific theory | BW, BMI | Weight: calibrated electronic scale. Trained team specialists measured to the nearest 0.1 kg wore light street clothes without shoes | Intervention: no changes in BW and BMI |
| Mache et al. (2015) [ | Germany | RCT, | Total | No specific theory | BMI | Weight and height measured but no further specifications | No changes in BMI |
|
| |||||||
| MacKinnon et al. (2010) [ | USA | RCT: 3 groups, | Total | No specific theory | BMI | Weight and height measured but no further specifications | Decreased BMI for TEAM intervention at 1 year ( |
|
| |||||||
| Merrill et al. (2014) [ | USA | 1 cohort group, | Year 1 | Motivational interviewing theory | BMI, BF% | BMI: weight and height measured but no further specifications | Over the 4-year period, decreased BMI ( |
|
| |||||||
| Merrill et al. (2010) [ | USA | 1 cohort group, | Total | Healthy belief model, Trans-theoretical model of change, motivational interviewing | BMI | Weight and height measured but no further specifications | Decreased BMI ( |
|
| |||||||
| Muto et al. (2001) [ | Japan | RCT, | Total | No specific theory | BMI | Weight and height measured but no further specifications | Intervention: decreased BMI by 0.5 kg/m2 ( |
|
| |||||||
| Neville et al. (2011) [ | USA | Quasi-experimental: 3 groups, | Total | No specific theory | BW, BMI, BF% | Weight: calibrated electronic scale | Decreased BMI for the highest risk group (group #1) ( |
|
| |||||||
| Poole et al. (2001) [ | USA | 1 cohort group, | Total | No specific theory | BF% | Skinfold calipers. Measurements were taken at the chest, abdomen, and thigh for men and triceps, supra-ilium, and thigh for females | Decreased BF% ( |
|
| |||||||
| Robroek et al. (2012) [ | Netherlands | RCT, | Total | Social cognitive theory | BMI | Weight and height measured, no further specifications. In the follow-up measurement, height and weight were self-reported | No decreases in BMI ( |
| Salinardi et al. (2013) [ | USA | RCT, | Total | Social ecological model | BW | Weight: calibrated electronic scale Measurements were taken with light indoor | BW decreased by an average of 8 kg ( |
Note. 1 = randomized control trial, 2 = body mass index, 3 = body fat percentage, 4 = waist circumference, 5 = bioelectrical impedance analyzer, 6 = body weight, and 7 = sugar-sweetened beverages.
Figure 1Article extraction.
Quality of studies within the systematic review (n=23).
| Author (Year) | Quality rating | Research question stated | Clear of selection bias | Comparable study groups | Withdraws discussed | Blinding use | Intervention described | Outcomes defined | Appropriate statistical analyses | Results support conclusions | No potential for funding bias |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Allen et al. (2012) [ | + | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| Almeida et al. (2015) [ | + | Y | Y | Y | N | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| Baker Parker et al. (2010) [ | + | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| Barham et al. (2011) [ | + | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| Campbell et al. (2002) [ | + | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| Christensen et al. (2012) [ | + | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| Fernandez et al. (2015) [ | + | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| French et al. (2010) [ | + | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| Goetzel et al. (2015) [ | + | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| Hochart et al. (2011) [ | + | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| LeCheminant et al. (2012) LeCheminant | + | Y | N | N/A | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| Lemon et al. (2014) [ | + | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| Leyk et al. (2014) [ | + | Y | N | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| Linde et al. (2012) [ | + | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| Mache et al. (2015) [ | + | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| MacKinnon et al. (2010) [ | + | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| Merrill et al. (2014) [ | + | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| Merrill et al. (2010) [ | + | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| Muto et al. (2001) [ | + | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| Neville et al. (2011) [ | + | Y | Y | N/A | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| Poole et al. (2001) [ | + | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| Robroek et al. (2012) [ | + | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| Salinardi et al. (2013) [ | + | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
Note. Quality ratings: (+) = positive.