| Literature DB >> 31388601 |
Megan Ferriby1, Keeley Pratt1,2, Lorraine Wallace3, Brian C Focht4, Sabrena Noria2, Bradley Needleman2.
Abstract
As US obesity rates increase, more patients, particularly females, are seeking out bariatric surgery. As bariatric surgery patients' social supports have been vastly understudied, clinicians and researchers have limited information about how to include support figures, including romantic partners, in the surgery process. To address this gap in knowledge, we are conducting a four-arm randomized controlled trial to assess the feasibility, acceptability and preliminary efficacy for the inclusion of romantic partners and support figures throughout the bariatric surgery process for a group of 110 women age 18 years or older. Patients will be randomized based upon their cohabitating romantic relationships at baseline. Female patients who have a cohabitating romantic partner will be randomized to one of two arms: partner attended (PA), and partner attended treatment as usual (PA-TU). To provide greater detail about social support during the bariatric process, interested patients (female or male) not in cohabitating romantic relationships will be randomized into support figure attended (SFA) and SFA-TU arms. Four data collection points are planned, including 4-months pre-surgery, 2 weeks pre-surgery, 2 weeks and 2-months post-surgery. Feasibility and acceptability of support figure/partner attendance collected at the final data point. Patients and support figures/partners will complete weight status, health behaviors, support for behavior change and relationship quality assessments at each time point. The rationale, design, theoretical framework, and methodology for the study are described. The results of this study will identify how support figures/partners influence patients' health behavior change and weight loss, and how relationships change over the surgery process.Entities:
Keywords: BMI, Body Mass Index; BS, Bariatric Surgery; Bariatric surgery; PA, Partner Attended; PA-TU, Partner Attended Treatment as Usual; Randomized control trial; Romantic relationships; SFA, Support Figure Attended; SFA-TU, Support Figure Attended – Treatment as Usual; Social support
Year: 2019 PMID: 31388601 PMCID: PMC6676458 DOI: 10.1016/j.conctc.2019.100422
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Commun ISSN: 2451-8654
Fig. 1Theorectical model.
Fig. 2Recruitment scheme.
Description of each Arm's inclusion and exclusion criteria for both patients and partners.
| Arm | Inclusion Criteria | Exclusion Criteria |
|---|---|---|
| PA/PA-TU Arms: | ||
| Patient | ≥18 years of age speak and read/write English seeking bariatric surgery identify as female have a romantic partner living with them the majority of the week (≥4 days), for at least 6 months | known terminal health diagnosis for (i.e., cancer) known history of domestic violence or abuse between the patient and partner romantic partner lives outside the home ≥4 days per week |
| Partner | ≥18 years of age speak and read/write English | known terminal health diagnosis for (i.e., cancer) known history of domestic violence or abuse between the patient and support figure history of bariatric surgery |
| SFA/SFA-TU Arms | ||
| Patient | ≥18 years of age speak and read/write English seeking bariatric surgery identify a support figure who lives in the home with them the majority of the week (≥4 days) for at least 6 months | known terminal health diagnosis for (i.e., cancer) known history of domestic violence or abuse between the patient and support figure support figure lives outside the home ≥4 days per week |
| Support figure | ≥18 year years of age speak and read/write English | known terminal health diagnosis for (i.e., cancer) known history of domestic violence or abuse between the patient and support figure history of bariatric surgery |
Note. PA is defined as partner attended arm, PA-TU is defined at partner attended – treatment as usual arm, SFA is defined at support figure attended arm, and SFA-TU is defined as support figure attended – treatment as usual arm.
Data collection timepoints and measures employed.
| Variables | Measures | Who | TI | T2 | T3 | T4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Preliminary Efficacy (All arms) | ||||||
| Weight | BMI (height, weight), BMI change, %EWL | Patient | X | X | X | X |
| Weight Loss Efforts | Strategies for Weight Management scale | Partner | X | X | X | X |
| Diet | Adherence Item | Patient | X | X | X | X |
| Physical Activity | Physical Activity Record | Patient | X | X | X | X |
| Support for Behavior Change | Social Support and Eating Habits Survey & Social Support and Exercise Survey | Patient, | X | X | X | X |
| Family Functioning | Family Assessment Device- General Functioning Subscale | Patient, | X | X | X | X |
| Preliminary Efficacy (PA/PA-TU arms) | ||||||
| Relationship Quality | Abbreviated Dyadic Assessment Scale | Patient, Partner | X | X | X | X |
| Relationship Security | Relationship Structure Questionnaire | Patient, Partner | X | X | X | X |
| Feasibility (PA/SFA only) | ||||||
| Attendance | Patient, Partner | X | X | X | ||
| Acceptability (PA/SFA only) | ||||||
| Open Ended Question, Semi-structured interviews | Patient, Partner | X | ||||
Note.
Lytle, Moe, Nanney, Laska, & Linde, 2014.
Sarwer et al., 2008.
Bouchard et al., 1983.
Busby, Christensen, Crane, & Larson, 1995.
Fraley, Heffernan, Vicary, Brumbaugh, 2011.
Sallis, Grossman, Pinski, Patterson, Nader, 1987.
Epstein, Baldwin & Bishop, 1983.