Search

Background:There is evidence that commercially available behavioural weight management programmes can lead to short-term weight loss and reductions in glycaemia. Here, we aimed to provide the 5-year impact and cost-effectiveness of these interventions compared with a brief intervention. Methods:WRAP was a non-blinded, parallel-group randomised controlled trial (RCT). We recruited from primary care practices in England and randomly assigned participants to one of three interventions (brief intervention, 12-week open-group behavioural programme [WW, formerly Weight Watchers], or a 52-week open-group WW behavioural programme) in an uneven (2:5:5) allocation. Participants were followed up 5 years after randomisation using data from measurement visits at primary care practices or a research centre, review of primary care electronic medical notes, and self-report questionnaires. The primary outcome was change in weight at 5 years follow-up, assessed using analysis of covariance. We also estimated cost-effectiveness of the intervention. This study is registered at Current Controlled Trials, ISRCTN64986150. Findings:Between Oct 18, 2012, and Feb 10, 2014, we recruited 1269 eligible participants (two participants were randomly assigned but not eligible and therefore excluded) and 1040 (82%) consented to be approached about additional follow-up and to have their medical notes reviewed at 5 years. The primary outcome (weight) was ascertained for 871 (69%) of 1267 eligible participants. Mean duration of follow-up was 5·1 (SD 0·3) years. Mean weight change from baseline to 5 years was −0·46 (SD 8·31) kg in the brief intervention group, −1·95 (9·55) kg in the 12-week programme group, and −2·67 (9·81) kg in the 52-week programme. The adjusted difference in weight change was –1·76 (95% CI –3·68 to 0·17) kg between the 52-week programme and the brief intervention; –0·80 (–2·13 to 0·54) kg between the 52-week and the 12-week programme; and –0·96 (–2·90 to 0·97) kg between the 12-week programme and the brief intervention. During the trial, the 12-week programme incurred the lowest cost and produced the highest quality-adjusted life-years (QALY). Simulations beyond 5 years suggested that the 52-week programme would deliver the highest QALYs at the lowest cost and would be the most cost-effective. No participants reported adverse events related to the intervention. Interpretation:Although the difference in weight change between groups was not statistically significant, some weight loss was maintained at 5 years after an open-group behavioural weight management programme. Health economic modelling suggests that this could have important implications to reduce the incidence of weight-related disease and these interventions might be cost-saving.

INTRODUCTION: The cost-effectiveness and long-term health impact of behavioural weight management programmes depends on post-treatment weight-loss maintenance. Growing evidence suggests that interventions using acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) could improve long-term weight management. We developed an ACT-based, guided self-help intervention to support adults who have recently completed a behavioural weight loss programme. This study will assess the feasibility and acceptability of this type of intervention and findings will inform the development of a full-scale trial. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a pragmatic, randomised, single-blind, parallel group, two-arm, feasibility study with an embedded process evaluation. We will recruit and randomise 60 adults who have recently completed a behavioural weight loss programme to the ACT-based intervention or standard care, using a computer-generated sequence with 2:1 allocation stratified by diabetes status and sex. Baseline and 6-month measurements will be completed using online questionnaires. Qualitative interviews will be conducted with a subsample of participants and coaches about their experiences at 3 (mid-intervention) and 6 (postintervention) months. Feasibility and acceptability of the intervention, and a full-scale trial will be assessed using a number of outcomes, including adherence to, and engagement with the intervention, recruitment and retention rates, proportion of missing data for each outcome measure, participants' experiences of the intervention and study, and coaches' experiences of delivering intervention support. Quantitative and qualitative findings will be integrated and summarised to contribute to the interpretation of the main feasibility evaluation findings. Value of information methods will be used to estimate the decision uncertainty associated with the intervention's cost-effectiveness and determine the value of a definitive trial. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was received from Cambridge South Research Ethics Committee on 15/03/2021 (21/EE/0024). This protocol (V.2) was approved on 19 April 2021. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals and communicated to other stakeholders as appropriate. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN12685964., This study was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Programme Grants for Applied Research Programme (RP-PG-0216-20010). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.

Background: There is considerable heterogeneity in long-term weight loss among people referred to obesity treatment programmes. It is unclear whether attendance at face-to-face sessions in the early weeks of the programme is an independent predictor of long-term success. Objective: To investigate whether frequency of attendance at a community weight loss programme over the first 12 weeks is associated with long-term weight change. Methods: Participants were randomised to receive brief support only (control, n = 211), or a weight loss programme for 12 weeks (n = 530) or 52 weeks (n = 528). This study included participants with data on session attendance over the first 12 weeks (n = 889) compared to the control group. The association between attendance (continuously) and weight loss was explored using a linear model. A multi-level mixed-effects linear model was used to investigate whether attendance (categorised as 0, 1, 2–5, 6—9, and 10–12 sessions) was associated with weight loss at 3, 12, and 24 months compared to the control. Results: For every session attended in the first 12 weeks, the average weight loss was –0.259 kg/session at 24 months (p = 0.005). Analysis by attendance group found only those attending 10–12 sessions had significantly greater weight loss (–7.5 kg [95% CI –8.1 to –6.9] at 12 months; –4.7 kg [95% CI –5.3 to –4.1] at 24 months) compared to the control group (–3.4 [95% CI –4.5 to –2.4] at 12 months, –2.5 [95% CI –3.5 to –1.5] at 24 months). Early attendance was higher for people ≥70 years, but there was no evidence of a difference by gender, ethnicity, education, or income. Conclusions: Greater attendance at a community weight loss programme in the first 12 weeks is associated with enhanced weight loss up to 24 months. Regular attendance at a programme could be used as a criterion for continued provision of weight loss services to maximise the cost-effectiveness of interventions.

IntroductionPeople with type 2 diabetes (T2D) can improve glycaemic control or even achieve remission through weight loss and reduce their use of medication and risk of cardiovascular disease. The Glucose Lowering through Weight management (GLoW) trial will evaluate whether a tailored diabetes education and behavioural weight management programme (DEW) is more effective and cost-effective than a diabetes education (DE) programme in helping people with overweight or obesity and a recent diagnosis of T2D to lower their blood glucose, lose weight and improve other markers of cardiovascular risk.Methods and analysisThis study is a pragmatic, randomised, single-blind, parallel group, two-arm, superiority trial. We will recruit 576 adults with body mass index>25 kg/m2and diagnosis of T2D in the past 3 years and randomise them to a tailored DEW or a DE programme. Participants will attend measurement appointments at a local general practitioner practice or research centre at baseline, 6 and 12 months. The primary outcome is 12-month change in glycated haemoglobin. The effect of the intervention on the primary outcome will be estimated and tested using a linear regression model (analysis of covariance) including randomisation group and adjusted for baseline value of the outcome and the randomisation stratifiers. Participants will be included in the group to which they were randomised, under the intention-to-treat principle. Secondary outcomes include 6-month and 12-month changes in body weight, body fat percentage, systolic and diastolic blood pressure and lipid profile; probability of achieving good glycaemic control; probability of achieving remission from diabetes; probability of losing 5% and 10% body weight and modelled cardiovascular risk (UKPDS). An intention-to-treat within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis will be conducted from NHS and societal perspectives using participant-level data. Qualitative interviews will be conducted with participants to understand why and how the programme achieved its results and how participants manage their weight after the programme ends.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was received from East of Scotland Research Ethics Service on 15 May 2018 (18/ES/0048). This protocol (V.3) was approved on 19 June 2019. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals and communicated to other stakeholders as appropriate.Trial registration numberISRCTN18399564.