Kerstin Bauer1, Sandra Schild2, Helene Sauer2, Martin Teufel3, Andreas Stengel2,4, Katrin Elisabeth Giel2, Philipp Schellhorn5, Florian Junne2,6, Andreas Nieß5, Stephan Zipfel2, Isabelle Mack2. 1. Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany, kerstin.d.bauer@googlemail.com. 2. Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany. 3. LVR-Clinic for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany. 4. Department for Psychosomatic Medicine, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin and Berlin Institute of Health, Charité Center for Internal Medicine and Dermatology, Berlin, Germany. 5. Department of Sports Medicine, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany. 6. Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Magdeburg, Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Multidisciplinary obesity services at university hospitals usually treat patients with more complex and severe obesity. In addition, patients with Class 3 obesity, in particular, have different attitudes regarding the choices of therapy. METHODS: This explorative study investigated the effect of patient attitudes towards bariatric surgery on body weight change (primary outcome) and psychological improvement (secondary outcomes: quality of life, depression, anxiety, and eating behaviour) in a 6-month moderate behavioural weight loss (BWL) programme in a university outpatient setting. RESULTS: 297 patients with mostly Class 3 obesity participated in the programme. The patients did not yet have any indications for bariatric surgery. Of the participants, 37% had a positive attitude towards bariatric surgery (POS), whereas 38% had a negative attitude (NEG). The drop-out rate was 8%. NEG participants lost significantly more body weight than the POS participants (intention-to-treat population: 4.5 [SD: 6.3] kg versus 0.4 [SD: 5.8] kg; p < 0.001). In both subgroups, anxiety, depression, the mental score for quality of life, and eating behaviour improved. CONCLUSION: A BWL treatment in a clinical setting identified 2 distinct groups with different attitudes towards bariatric surgery that were associated with different body weight change outcomes. These groups may require differently targeted programmes to achieve the best body weight loss results.
INTRODUCTION: Multidisciplinary obesity services at university hospitals usually treat patients with more complex and severe obesity. In addition, patients with Class 3 obesity, in particular, have different attitudes regarding the choices of therapy. METHODS: This explorative study investigated the effect of patient attitudes towards bariatric surgery on body weight change (primary outcome) and psychological improvement (secondary outcomes: quality of life, depression, anxiety, and eating behaviour) in a 6-month moderate behavioural weight loss (BWL) programme in a university outpatient setting. RESULTS: 297 patients with mostly Class 3 obesity participated in the programme. The patients did not yet have any indications for bariatric surgery. Of the participants, 37% had a positive attitude towards bariatric surgery (POS), whereas 38% had a negative attitude (NEG). The drop-out rate was 8%. NEG participants lost significantly more body weight than the POS participants (intention-to-treat population: 4.5 [SD: 6.3] kg versus 0.4 [SD: 5.8] kg; p < 0.001). In both subgroups, anxiety, depression, the mental score for quality of life, and eating behaviour improved. CONCLUSION: A BWL treatment in a clinical setting identified 2 distinct groups with different attitudes towards bariatric surgery that were associated with different body weight change outcomes. These groups may require differently targeted programmes to achieve the best body weight loss results.
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: Florian Junne; Stefan Ehehalt; Katrin Ziser; Thomas Reinehr; Susanna Wiegand; Johannes Mander; Peter Martus; Isabelle Mack; Andreas Oberle; Martin Wabitsch; Tobias Renner; Stephan Zipfel; Katrin E Giel Journal: Int J Obes (Lond) Date: 2019-07-25 Impact factor: 5.095
Authors: A N Fabricatore; T A Wadden; A J Higginbotham; L F Faulconbridge; A M Nguyen; S B Heymsfield; M S Faith Journal: Int J Obes (Lond) Date: 2011-02-22 Impact factor: 5.095
Authors: John A Batsis; Francisco Lopez-Jimenez; Maria L Collazo-Clavell; Matthew M Clark; Virend K Somers; Michael G Sarr Journal: Am J Med Date: 2009-11 Impact factor: 4.965