Long-term efficacy of a behavior modification weight loss program: A comparison of two follow-up maintenance strategies

Beneke, William M.; Paulsen, Barbara K.

doi:10.1016/s0005-7894(79)80003-9

Cited by 22 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The most important interpretation of the present findings is that the strategies tested were not effective, an outcome hardly unique in the maintenance literature (e.g., Ashby & Wilson, 1978;Beneke, Paulsen & McReynolds, 1978;Beneke & Paulsen, 1979;Hall et al, 1978;ONeil, Currey, Hirsch, Riddle, Taylor, Malcolm, & Sexauer, 1979;Wilson & Brownell, 1978). However, closer evaluatibn of the present results strongly suggests that the generally poor outcome was due to lack of adherence during the maintenance period.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 52%

A comparison of specific strategies for long term maintenance following a behavioural treatment program for obese women

Bonato¹,

Boland

1986

Int. J. Eat. Disord.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over a 10‐week period, 102 women who had been randomly assigned to conditions received 7 sessions of a standard behavioral treatment, followed by 3 sessions of training in one of the following 5 maintenance strategies: continued self‐monitoring, urge control, relapse prevention, a combination of the previous three strategies, or attention‐placebo. There were 85 women available for a 1 year follow‐up. Results showed that the different maintenance conditions did not differentially affect weight loss beyond that produced by the attention‐placebo. Participants lost an average of 5.08 kg during the 10‐week program. They began to regain weight by the 4‐month follow‐up and continued to do so at the 1‐year follow‐up. However, mean weight at the 1‐year follow‐up was still significantly below pretreatment weight (mean Joss of 2.18 kg). In total, 21.8% of the sample either maintained postprogram weight or continued to lose weight, whereas 29% either returned to pretreatment weight or regained above pretreatment weight by the 1‐year follow‐up. Consideration of results clearly suggests that adherence is a major problem with maintenance techniques.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 52%

A comparison of specific strategies for long term maintenance following a behavioural treatment program for obese women

Bonato¹,

Boland

1986

Int. J. Eat. Disord.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Analyses conducted with vascular patients alone indicate these results were not influenced by treatment history. The lack of superiority of booster treatments parallels recent long-term findings from the smoking cessation (Colletti & Supnick, 1980) and weight reduction (Ashby & Wilson, 1977;Beneke & Paulsen, 1979;Kingsley & Wilson, 1977) literatures. Further, for all but one measure of headache outcome (Peak Headache Intensity for tension headache sufferers only), results at the end of treatment were highly similar to those at all stages of follow-up, a finding consistent with the conclusions of Nicholson and Berman (1983).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 72%

Biofeedback and relaxation training for chronic headache: A controlled comparison of booster treatments and regular contacts for long-term maintenance.

Andrasik¹,

Blanchard²,

Neff³

et al. 1984

Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Following behavioral treatment, 55 successfully treated headache sufferers were randomly assigned to one of two follow-up conditions: regular contact or booster treatment. Subjects assigned to regular contact were asked to continue daily monitoring of headache activity and home practice and were seen in the office for a brief visit (10-15 min maximum) on a monthly basis for 6 months. Subjects assigned to booster treatments received a full session of treatment during their six monthly visits. The progress of all subjects was followed through I year. Headache diary records and interviews with patients and significant others revealed no major differences between conditions, indicating regular contact may be an efficient procedure for maintaining treatment gains. In addition, subjects attributed a number of positive side effects to treatment; no negative side effects were reported by any subject. Home practice was found to be unrelated to maintenance. The significance of these findings is discussed.

show abstract

“…It should be remembered that the present sample had been contacted previously in 1978 and asked about their weights. Findings reported by Ashley and Wilson (1977), Beneke andPaulsen (1979), andPerri et al (1984) suggest that postprogram contacts, themselves, may help some patients reactivate behavioral weight-management approaches orremotivate them to start dieting again. However, since there was no significant difference between the 1978 and 1983 mean sample's weights, it seems plausible that the present follow-up efforts did not contribute to any meaningfully net motivating effect across the sample.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-term follow-up of patients who lost weight in a cognitive-behavioral treatment program.

Jordan¹,

Canavan²,

Steer³

1987

Psychology of Addictive Behaviors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Long-term efficacy of a behavior modification weight loss program: A comparison of two follow-up maintenance strategies

Cited by 22 publications

References 6 publications

A comparison of specific strategies for long term maintenance following a behavioural treatment program for obese women

A comparison of specific strategies for long term maintenance following a behavioural treatment program for obese women

Biofeedback and relaxation training for chronic headache: A controlled comparison of booster treatments and regular contacts for long-term maintenance.

Long-term follow-up of patients who lost weight in a cognitive-behavioral treatment program.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About