Bariatric surgery is recognized as the most clinically and cost-effective treatment for people with severe and complex obesity. Many people presenting for surgery have pre-existing low vitamin and mineral concentrations. The incidence of these may increase after bariatric surgery as all procedures potentially cause clinically significant micronutrient deficiencies. Therefore, preparation for surgery and long-term nutritional monitoring and follow-up are essential components of bariatric surgical care. These guidelines update the 2014 British Obesity and Metabolic Surgery Society nutritional guidelines. Since the 2014 guidelines, the working group has been expanded to include healthcare professionals working in specialist and non-specialist care as well as patient representatives. In addition, in these updated guidelines, the current evidence has been systematically reviewed for adults and adolescents undergoing the following procedures: adjustable gastric band, sleeve gastrectomy, Rouxen-Y gastric bypass and biliopancreatic diversion/duodenal switch. Using methods based on Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network methodology, the levels of evidence and recommendations have been graded. These guidelines are comprehensive,
Summary Benefits of bariatric surgery for obesity related comorbidities are well established. However, in the longer term, patients can become vulnerable to procedure specific problems, experience weight regain and continue to need monitoring and management of comorbidities. Effective longer term follow‐up is vital due to these complex needs post‐surgery. Current guidance recommends annual long‐term follow‐up after bariatric surgery. However, attendance can be low, and failure to attend is associated with poorer outcomes. Understanding patients' experiences and needs is central to the delivery of effective care. This rapid review has synthesized the current qualitative literature on patient experiences of healthcare professional (HCP) led follow‐up from 12 months after bariatric surgery. A recurring theme was the need for more and extended follow‐up care, particularly psychological support. Enablers to attending follow‐up care were patient self‐efficacy as well as HCP factors such as a non‐judgemental attitude, knowledge and continuity of care. Barriers included unrealistic patient expectations and perceived lack of HCP expertise. Some preferences were expressed including patient initiated access to HCPs and more information preoperatively to prepare for potential post‐surgery issues. Insights gained from this work will help identify areas for improvement to care in order to optimize longer term outcomes.
Guidelines suggest that very-low-energy diets (VLEDs) should be used to treat obesity only when rapid weight loss is clinically indicated because of concerns about rapid weight regain. Literature databases were searched from inception to November 2014. Randomized trials were included where the intervention included a VLED and the comparator was no intervention or an intervention that could be given in a general medical setting in adults that were overweight. Two reviewers characterized the population, intervention, control groups, outcomes and appraised quality. The primary outcome was weight change at 12 months from baseline. Compared with a behavioural programme alone, VLEDs combined with a behavioural programme achieved -3.9 kg [95% confidence interval (CI) -6.7 to -1.1] at 1 year. The difference at 24 months was -1.4 kg (95%CI -2.6 to -0.2) and at 38-60 months was -1.3 kg (95%CI -2.9 to 0.2). Nineteen per cent of the VLED group discontinued treatment prematurely compared with 20% of the comparator groups, relative risk 0.96 (0.56 to 1.66). One serious adverse event, hospitalization with cholecystitis, was reported in the VLED group and none in the comparator group. Very-low-energy diets with behavioural programmes achieve greater long-term weight loss than behavioural programmes alone, appear tolerable and lead to few adverse events suggesting they could be more widely used than current guidelines suggest.
Bariatric surgery can facilitate weight loss and improvement in medical comorbidities. It has a profound impact on nutrition, and patients need access to follow-up and aftercare. NICE CG189 Obesity emphasized the importance of a minimum of 2 years follow-up in the bariatric surgical service and recommended that following discharge from the surgical service, there should be annual monitoring as part of a shared care model of chronic disease management. NHS England Obesity Clinical Reference Group commissioned a multi-professional subgroup, which included patient representatives, to develop bariatric surgery follow-up guidelines. Terms of reference and scope were agreed upon. The group members took responsibility for different sections of the guidelines depending on their areas of expertise and experience. The quality of the evidence was rated and strength graded. Four different shared care models were proposed, taking into account the variation in access to bariatric surgical services and specialist teams across the country. The common features include annual review, ability for a GP to refer back to specialist centre, submission of follow-up data to the national data base to NBSR. Clinical commissioning groups need to ensure that a shared care model is implemented as patient safety and long-term follow-up are important.
BackgroundThere is limited evidence that nutritional labelling on food/drinks is changing eating behaviours. Physical activity calorie equivalent (PACE) food labelling aims to provide the public with information about the amount of physical activity required to expend the number of kilocalories in food/drinks (eg, calories in this pizza requires 45 min of running to burn), to encourage healthier food choices and reduce disease.ObjectiveWe aimed to systematically search for randomised controlled trials and experimental studies of the effects of PACE food labelling on the selection, purchase or consumption of food/drinks.MethodsPACE food labelling was compared with any other type of food labelling or no labelling (comparator). Reports were identified by searching electronic databases, websites and social media platforms. Inverse variance meta-analysis was used to summarise evidence. Weighted mean differences (WMD) and 95% CIs were used to describe between-group differences using a random effects model.Results15 studies were eligible for inclusion. When PACE labelling was displayed on food/drinks and menus, significantly fewer calories were selected, relative to comparator labelling (WMD=−64.9 kcal, 95% CI −103.2 to −26.6, p=0.009, n=4606). Presenting participants with PACE food labelling results in the consumption of significantly fewer calories (WMD=−80.4 kcal, 95% CI−136.7 to −24.2, p=0.005, n=486) relative to comparator food labelling.ConclusionBased on current evidence PACE food labelling may reduce the number of kilocalories selected from menus and decrease the number of kilocalories/grams of food consumed by the public, compared with other types of food labelling/no labelling.Trial registration numberCRD42018088567.
Objective: To investigate the efficacy of water preloading before meals as a weight loss strategy for adults with obesity. Methods: A two-group randomized controlled trial was conducted in Birmingham, England. Eighty-four adults with obesity were recruited from general practices. All participants were given a face-to-face weight management consultation at baseline (30 min) and a follow-up telephone consultation at 2 weeks (10 min). At baseline, participants were randomized to either drinking 500 ml of water 30 min before their main meals or an attention control group where participants were asked to imagine their stomach was full before meals. The primary outcome was weight change at 12-week follow-up. Several measures of adherence were also used, including 24 h total urine collections. Results: 41 participants were randomized to the intervention group and 43 to the comparator group. The water preloading group lost 21.3 kg (95% CI 22.4 to 20.1, P 5 0.028) more than comparators at follow up. Adjusting for ethnicity, deprivation, age, and gender resulted in the intervention group losing 21.2 kg (95% CI 22.4 to 0.07, P 5 0.063) more than the comparator. Conclusions: There is preliminary evidence that water preloading before main meals leads to a moderate weight loss at follow up. ISRCTN33238158
BackgroundGuidelines suggest that GPs should intervene on patients' weight, but to do so GPs must first recognise that a patient may have a weight problem and weigh them.
Purpose of the Review Pathways for obesity prevention and treatment are well documented, yet the prevalence of obesity is rising, and access to treatment (including bariatric surgery) is limited. This review seeks to assess the current integrated clinical pathway for obesity management in England and determine the major challenges. Recent Findings Evidence for tier 2 (community-based lifestyle intervention) and tier 3 (specialist weight management services) is limited, and how it facilitates care and improve outcomes in tier 4 remains uncertain. Treatment access, rigidity in pathways, uncertain treatment outcomes and weight stigma seems to be major barriers to improved care. Summary More emphasis must be placed on access to effective treatments, treatment flexibility, addressing stigma and ensuring treatment efficacy including long-term health outcomes. Prevention and treatment should both receive significant focus though should be considered to be largely separate pathways. A simplified system for weight management is needed to allow flexibility and the delivery of personalized care including post-bariatric surgery care for those who need it.
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.