Weight losses in lifestyle interventions are variable, yet prediction of long-term success is difficult. Objective We examined the utility of using various weight loss thresholds in the first 2 months of treatment for predicting 1-year outcomes. Design and Methods Participants included 2327 adults with type 2 diabetes (BMI:35.8±6.0) randomized to the intensive lifestyle intervention (ILI) of the Look AHEAD trial. ILI included weekly behavioral sessions designed to increase physical activity and reduce caloric intake. 1-month, 2-month, and 1-year weight changes were calculated. Results Participants failing to achieve a ≥2% weight loss at Month 1 were 5.6 (95% CI:4.5,7.0) times more likely to also not achieve a ≥10% weight loss at Year 1, compared to those losing ≥2% initially. These odds were increased to 11.6 (95% CI:8.6,15.6) when using a 3% weight loss threshold at Month 2. Only 15.2% and 8.2% of individuals failing to achieve the ≥2% and ≥3% thresholds at Months 1 and 2 respectively, go on to achieve a ≥10% weight loss at Year 1. Conclusions Given the association between initial and 1-year weight loss, the first few months of treatment may be an opportune time to identify those who are unsuccessful and utilize rescue efforts.
Increasing sedentary work has been associated with greater cardiovascular and metabolic risk, as well as premature mortality. Interrupting the sedentary workday with health-promoting work breaks can counter these negative health effects. To examine the potential sustainability of work-break programs, we assessed the acceptance of these breaks among participants in a Booster Break program. We analyzed qualitative responses from 35 participants across five worksites where one 15-min physical activity break was taken each workday. Two worksites completed a 1-year intervention and three worksites completed a 6-month intervention. Responses to two open-ended questions about the acceptance and feasibility of Booster Breaks were obtained from a survey administered after the intervention. Three themes for benefits and two themes for barriers were identified. The benefit themes were (i) reduced stress and promoted enjoyment, (ii) increased health awareness and facilitated behavior change, and (iii) enhanced workplace social interaction. The barrier themes were the need for (iv) greater variety in Booster Break routines and (v) greater management support. This study provides empirical support for the acceptance and feasibility of Booster Breaks during the workday. Emphasizing the benefits and minimizing the barriers are strategies that can be used to implement Booster Breaks in other workplaces.
The overall purpose of this study was to pilot a multibehavioral, brief, stroke self-care treatment adapted for implementation with underserved racial/ethnic minority groups and to test the moderating effects of anxiety and depression on engagement in secondary stroke-prevention behaviors. Fifty-two participants were randomized to the secondary stroke prevention (STOP) (N = 27) or usual care (N = 25) group. The STOP program consisted of 3 culturally tailored information sessions and goal-setting activities that were delivered in person by a research assistant. Participants were assessed at baseline and 4-week follow-up for stroke knowledge, exercise, fruit and vegetable consumption, tobacco and alcohol use, and medication adherence (primary outcomes) and anxiety and depression (moderator variables). Between-groups analysis of covariance and logistic multiple regressions revealed significant between-group differences for stroke knowledge, tobacco use and moderating effects between tobacco and anxiety, and improved alcohol use. The STOP program decreased secondary stroke risk factors among underserved racial/ethnic minorities and should be tested in large-scale trials.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.