Personal and social norms for food portion sizes in lean and obese adults.

BACKGROUND: Portion size is an important component of dietary advice for weight control, but little is known about what portion sizes people consider 'normal'. This study determined the effect of body mass index (BMI), gender, dietary restraint and liking of the food on personal and social portion size norms for a range of foods and the degree of certainty over the norms. METHODS: Thirty lean (BMI 20-25 kg m(-)(2)) and 30 obese (BMI 30-35 kg m(-)(2)) men and women (aged 18-60 years) viewed 17 different portion sizes of 12 foods on a computer screen on two occasions a week apart. Participants responded 'more' or 'less' to each photograph reflecting personal portion size preference or perceived portion sizes of others. Personal and social norms for portion sizes of each food were determined using the method of constant stimuli giving a sigmoidal curve of the probability of answering 'less' over a range of portion sizes. The slope of the sigmoid at the norm gave a measure of certainty about the norm. Regression models were used to examine the effect of BMI, gender, dietary restraint and liking of the food on personal norms, social norms, the relationship between norms, and the slopes. RESULTS: Personal norms were significantly larger in the obese (P=0.026), men (P<0.001), those with lower dietary restraint (P<0.001), and those with higher liking for the food (P<0.001). Social norms were larger for women (P=0.012). The slopes at the norms were 30% shallower in the obese and in men (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Larger personal norms for portion size among the obese, men, those with lower dietary restraint and those with higher liking for a food imply greater consumption, which may undermine weight control. Shallower slopes for norms in the obese and in men may imply less clearly defined habitual portion sizes.

The challenge of a 2-year follow-up after intervention for weight loss in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Many weight loss programmes show short-term success, but long-term data in larger studies are scarce, especially in community settings. Attrition is common and complicates the interpretation of long-term outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To investigate 2-year outcomes and explore issues of attrition and missing data. SUBJECTS: A total of 772 overweight and obese adults recruited by primary care practices in Australia, Germany and the UK and randomised to a 12-month weight loss intervention delivered in a commercial programme (CP) or in standard care (SC). MEASUREMENT: Weight change from 0-24 and 12-24 months including measured weights only and measured and self-reported weights, using last observation carried forward (LOCF), baseline observation carried forward (BOCF), completers-only and missing-at-random (MAR) analyses. RESULTS: A total of 203 participants completed the 24-month visit. Using measured weights only, there was a trend for greater 24-month weight loss in CP than in SC, but the difference was only statistically significant in the LOCF and BOCF analyses: LOCF: -4.14 vs -1.99 kg, difference adjusted for centre -2.08 kg, P<0.001; BOCF: -1.33 vs -0.74 kg, adjusted difference -0.60 kg, P=0.032; completers: -4.76 vs -2.99 kg, adjusted difference -1.53 kg, P=0.113; missing at random: -3.00 vs -1.94 kg, adjusted difference -1.04 kg, P=0.150. Both groups gained weight from 12-24 months and weight regain was significantly (P<0.001) greater for CP than for SC in all analysis approaches. Inclusion of self-reported weights from a further 138 participants did not change the interpretation of the findings. CONCLUSION: Initial weight loss was poorly maintained during the no-intervention follow-up, but both groups did have lower weight over the 24 months. Attrition was high in both groups, and assumptions about missing data had considerable impact on the magnitude and statistical significance of treatment effects. It is vital that trials on weight loss interventions consider the plausibility of these differences in an analytical approach when interpreting research findings and comparing data between studies.

Changes in physical activity during a weight loss intervention and follow-up: a randomized controlled trial.

Physical activity is an important component in weight loss treatment and weight maintenance. We evaluated the physical activity component of two weight loss programmes, either standard care (SC) as defined by national guidelines, or a commercial programme (CP; Weight Watchers) over the period of weight loss and follow-up. 772 adults (mean body mass index: 31.4 ± 2.6 kg m(-2)) were recruited by primary care practices in Australia, the United Kingdom, and Germany, and randomly assigned to 12 months SC, or the CP. They were then followed up at 24 months. Change in physical activity levels were assessed by the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ)-short form, and pedometer recordings. Both groups reported increases in physical activity using the IPAQ from baseline to 12 months and 24 months (within groups P < 0.0001) and in pedometer steps from baseline to 12 months only (within groups P < 0.0001). Differences between groups with both methods of assessment were not significant. There was a significant difference in weight loss between the groups at 12 months favouring the CP group; however, this statistical difference was not maintained at 24 months. In conclusion, despite similar increases in reported activity, there were significant differences in weight loss and regain between groups. Therefore, greater weight loss seen with the CP is unlikely to be due to increases in physical activity. Trends in pedometer steps mirrored changes in weight over time more closely than the IPAQ; however, both assessment tools have limitations. Better activity assessment measures are needed to more accurately gauge changes in physical activity during weight loss interventions.

A within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis of primary care referral to a commercial provider for weight loss treatment, relative to standard care--an international randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Due to the high prevalence of overweight and obesity there is a need to identify cost-effective approaches for weight loss in primary care and community settings. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the cost effectiveness of two weight loss programmes of 1-year duration, either standard care (SC) as defined by national guidelines, or a commercial provider (Weight Watchers) (CP). DESIGN: This analysis was based on a randomised controlled trial of 772 adults (87% female; age 47.4±12.9 years; body mass index 31.4±2.6 kg m(-2)) recruited by health professionals in primary care in Australia, United Kingdom and Germany. Both a health sector and societal perspective were adopted to calculate the cost per kilogram of weight loss and the ICER, expressed as the cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY). RESULTS: The cost per kilogram of weight loss was USD122, 90 and 180 for the CP in Australia, the United Kingdom and Germany, respectively. For SC the cost was USD138, 151 and 133, respectively. From a health-sector perspective, the ICER for the CP relative to SC was USD18 266, 12 100 and 40 933 for Australia, the United Kingdom and Germany, respectively. Corresponding societal ICER figures were USD31,663, 24,996 and 51,571. CONCLUSION: The CP was a cost-effective approach from a health funder and societal perspective. Despite participants in the CP group attending two to three times more meetings than the SC group, the CP was still cost effective even including these added patient travel costs. This study indicates that it is cost effective for general practitioners (GPs) to refer overweight and obese patients to a CP, which may be better value than expending public funds on GP visits to manage this problem.