Morgane Bennett1, Jessica A Whiteley2, Jiayan Gu3, Azar Gaminian3, Melissa A Napolitano4. 1. Department of Prevention and Community Health, Milken Institute School of Public Health, The George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA. Electronic address: bennettm@gwu.edu. 2. College of Nursing and Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Boston, Boston, MA, USA. 3. Department of Prevention and Community Health, Milken Institute School of Public Health, The George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA. 4. Department of Prevention and Community Health, Milken Institute School of Public Health, The George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA; Department of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Milken Institute School of Public Health, The George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite the public health significance of overweight and obesity, weight management has remained a low priority for health-related programming on university campuses. OBJECTIVE: Investigate the need for and feasibility of implementing university-based weight loss programs. METHODS: The Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM) was used as a framework. Semi-structured individual interviews were conducted with fifteen university staff and students from two large U.S. universities in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic. Interviews aimed to assess readiness, preferences, characteristics, barriers and facilitators in each of the four adapted PRISM domains: (1) Organizational and Recipient (Student) Perspectives on the Intervention, (2) Recipient (Student) Characteristics, (3) Internal Environment (organizational characteristics and infrastructure), and (4) External Environment. Verbatim transcriptions were analyzed using inductive and deductive thematic analyses. Themes were extracted as outlined by Consensual Qualitative Research. RESULTS: Participants supported university-based weight loss programs, but recognized barriers of resources, coordination across entities, and competing health issues taking priority for school programming. Campus built environment and students' busy schedules were identified as barriers to maintaining healthy weight and participation in weight loss programs. Recommendations included designing weight loss programming with a positive and holistic approach, minimizing weight-stigma, ensuring support from university leaders and students, and securing external funding. CONCLUSIONS: The identified themes provide recommendations for universities looking to develop and implement weight loss programming.
BACKGROUND: Despite the public health significance of overweight and obesity, weight management has remained a low priority for health-related programming on university campuses. OBJECTIVE: Investigate the need for and feasibility of implementing university-based weight loss programs. METHODS: The Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM) was used as a framework. Semi-structured individual interviews were conducted with fifteen university staff and students from two large U.S. universities in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic. Interviews aimed to assess readiness, preferences, characteristics, barriers and facilitators in each of the four adapted PRISM domains: (1) Organizational and Recipient (Student) Perspectives on the Intervention, (2) Recipient (Student) Characteristics, (3) Internal Environment (organizational characteristics and infrastructure), and (4) External Environment. Verbatim transcriptions were analyzed using inductive and deductive thematic analyses. Themes were extracted as outlined by Consensual Qualitative Research. RESULTS: Participants supported university-based weight loss programs, but recognized barriers of resources, coordination across entities, and competing health issues taking priority for school programming. Campus built environment and students' busy schedules were identified as barriers to maintaining healthy weight and participation in weight loss programs. Recommendations included designing weight loss programming with a positive and holistic approach, minimizing weight-stigma, ensuring support from university leaders and students, and securing external funding. CONCLUSIONS: The identified themes provide recommendations for universities looking to develop and implement weight loss programming.
Authors: Rebecca E Lee; Nathan H Parker; Allen M Hallett; Dennis Kao; Maria J Modelska; Hanadi S Rifai; Erica G Soltero; Daniel P O'Connor Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2021-03-16 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: Najat Yahia; Carrie A Brown; Ericka Snyder; Stephanie Cumper; Andrea Langolf; Chelsey Trayer; Chelsea Green Journal: J Community Health Date: 2017-08
Authors: William T Cefalu; George A Bray; Philip D Home; W Timothy Garvey; Samuel Klein; F Xavier Pi-Sunyer; Frank B Hu; Itamar Raz; Luc Van Gaal; Bruce M Wolfe; Donna H Ryan Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Rena R Wing; Deborah F Tate; Katelyn R Garcia; Judy Bahnson; Cora E Lewis; Mark A Espeland Journal: Obesity (Silver Spring) Date: 2017-08-07 Impact factor: 5.002
Authors: William Douglas Evans; Lorien C Abroms; David Broniatowski; Melissa Napolitano; Jeanie Arnold; Megumi Ichimiya; Sohail Agha Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-07-26 Impact factor: 4.614