The impact of low-energy total diet replacement with behavioural support for remission of type 2 diabetes on disordered eating (ARIADNE): Protocol for a non-inferiority randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: The National Health Service (NHS) in England is currently piloting a weight loss programme for remission of newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes (T2D), where participants replace all food with low-energy nutritionally complete formula products for 12 weeks (total diet replacement, TDR) and receive behavioural support. In a clinical trial, this programme led to remission in nearly half the participants. However, this weight loss programme might also worsen disordered eating and prompt eating disorders in susceptible people. We aim to investigate if the TDR programme is non-inferior to standard care in terms of disordered eating in susceptible individuals. METHODS: Fifty six people with newly diagnosed T2D, BMI ≥ 27 kg/m2, and medium to high scores of disordered eating based on the Eating Disorders Examination questionnaire (EDE-Q) will be randomised 1:1 to TDR receiving remote weekly/bi-weekly dietetic support or standard care. Participants will be re-assessed remotely at 1, 3, 4, 6, and 12 months. The primary outcome will be the between-group difference in the score of the EDE-Q. If the sample size can be expanded to 150, we will reduce the non-inferiority boundary. Weight, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), impairment from disordered eating, and distress will be secondary outcomes. Using the recorded consultations, we will evaluate the process in observed changes in eating behaviour and disordered eating. CONCLUSIONS: If TDR for T2D remission is deemed non-inferior to standard care, more people may enrol and benefit from T2D remission. If TDR exacerbates disordered eating, screening may reduce unintended harm. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05744232 (ClinicalTrials.gov, prospectively registered).

Brief opportunistic interventions by general practitioners to promote smoking cessation: A conversation analytic study.

Very brief opportunistic interventions for smoking cessation are effective, cost-saving for health systems, and universally recommended in guidelines. However, evidence suggests that clinicians are reluctant to intervene, citing interactional difficulties. Only one UK study has specifically examined smoking discussions, within naturally occurring primary care consultations. However smoking cessation treatment was not available at the time. We examined existing datasets amounting to 519 video-recordings of GP consultations in England for instances of talk about smoking. We used conversation analytic methods to assess patients' responses to doctors asking about smoking, giving advice on smoking, and offering cessation treatment. In 31 recordings it was apparent that the patient smoked, and, in 25/31 consultations, doctors initiated the topic of smoking. They did so by asking about smoking status, commonly during the history-taking phase of the consultation. In many instances, these questions led to active resistance from patients against being placed in a discreditable category, for example by minimising their smoking. This was more pronounced when GPs pursued efforts to quantify the amount smoked. Thereafter, where doctors returned to the topic of smoking, they did so typically by linking smoking to the patient's medical condition, which likewise led to resistance. Guidance recommends that GPs advise on how best to quit smoking where patients are interested in doing so, but this was only evident in a minority of consultations. Where GPs offered support for cessation, they did so using interactional practices that minimised the need for the patient to respond and thereby accept. Interactional difficulties were found to be common in consultations between GPs and people who smoke when GPs actions aligned with some VBA guidelines. Future research should examine when and how advice on how best to quit, and offers of support, should be delivered within primary care consultations.

Cost-effectiveness of bariatric surgery and non-surgical weight management programmes for adults with severe obesity: a decision analysis model.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the most cost-effective weight management programmes (WMPs) for adults, in England with severe obesity (BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2), who are more at risk of obesity related diseases. METHODS: An economic evaluation of five different WMPs: 1) low intensity (WMP1); 2) very low calorie diets (VLCD) added to WMP1; 3) moderate intensity (WMP2); 4) high intensity (Look AHEAD); and 5) Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) surgery, all compared to a baseline scenario representing no WMP. We also compare a VLCD added to WMP1 vs. WMP1 alone. A microsimulation decision analysis model was used to extrapolate the impact of changes in BMI, obtained from a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of WMPs and bariatric surgery, on long-term risks of obesity related disease, costs, quality adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) measured as incremental cost per QALY gained over a 30-year time horizon from a UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective. Sensitivity analyses explored the impact of long-term weight regain assumptions on results. RESULTS: RYGB was the most costly intervention but also generated the lowest incidence of obesity related disease and hence the highest QALY gains. Base case ICERs for WMP1, a VLCD added to WMP1, WMP2, Look AHEAD, and RYGB compared to no WMP were £557, £6628, £1540, £23,725 and £10,126 per QALY gained respectively. Adding a VLCD to WMP1 generated an ICER of over £121,000 per QALY compared to WMP1 alone. Sensitivity analysis found that all ICERs were sensitive to the modelled base case, five year post intervention cessation, weight regain assumption. CONCLUSIONS: RYGB surgery was the most effective and cost-effective use of scarce NHS funding resources. However, where fixed healthcare budgets or patient preferences exclude surgery as an option, a standard 12 week behavioural WMP (WMP1) was the next most cost-effective intervention.

Individual inflammatory marker abnormalities or inflammatory marker scores to identify primary care patients with unexpected weight loss for cancer investigation?

BACKGROUND: Combinations of inflammatory markers are used as prognostic scores in cancer patients with cachexia. We investigated whether they could also be used to prioritise patients attending primary care with unexpected weight loss for cancer investigation. METHODS: We used English primary care electronic health records data linked to cancer registry data from 12,024 patients with coded unexpected weight loss. For each individual inflammatory marker and score we estimated the sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, positive predictive value (PPV) and the area under the curve along with 95% confidence intervals for a cancer diagnosis within six months. RESULTS: The risk of cancer associated with two abnormal inflammatory markers combined in a score was higher than the risk associated with individual inflammatory marker abnormalities. However, the risk of cancer in weight loss associated with individual abnormalities, notably a raised C-reactive protein, was sufficient to trigger further investigation for cancer under current NICE guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: If scores including pairs of inflammatory marker abnormalities were to be used, in preference to individual abnormalities, fewer people would be investigated to diagnose one cancer with fewer false positives, but fewer people with cancer would be diagnosed overall.

A systematic review of UK-based long-term nonsurgical interventions for people with severe obesity (BMI ≥35 kg m-2 ).

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this project was to systematically review UK evidence on the effectiveness of long-term (≥12 months) weight management services (WMSs) for weight loss and weight maintenance for adults (≥16 years) with severe obesity (body mass index ≥35 kg m-2 ), who would generally be eligible for Tier 3 services. METHODS: Four data sources were searched from 1999 to October 2018. RESULTS: Our searches identified 20 studies, mostly noncomparative studies: 10 primary care interventions, nine in secondary care specialist weight management clinics and one commercial setting intervention. A programme including a phase of low energy formula diet (810-833 kcal day-1 ) showed the largest mean (SD) weight change at 12 months of -12.4 (11.4) kg for complete cases, with 25.3% dropout. Limitations or differences in evaluation and reporting (particularly for denominators), unclear dropout rates, and differences between participant groups in terms of comorbidities and psychological characteristics, made comparisons between WMSs and inferences challenging. CONCLUSIONS: There is a persistent and clear need for guidance on long-term weight data collection and reporting methods to allow comparisons across studies and services for participants with severe obesity. Data could also include quality of life, clinical outcomes, adverse events, costs and economic outcomes. A randomised trial comparison of National Health Service Tier 3 services with commercial WMSs would be of value.

Determinants and extent of weight recording in UK primary care: an analysis of 5 million adults' electronic health records from 2000 to 2017.

BACKGROUND: Excess weight and unexpected weight loss are associated with multiple disease states and increased morbidity and mortality, but weight measurement is not routine in many primary care settings. The aim of this study was to characterise who has had their weight recorded in UK primary care, how frequently, by whom and in relation to which clinical events, symptoms and diagnoses. METHODS: A longitudinal analysis of UK primary care electronic health records (EHR) data from 2000 to 2017. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise weight recording in terms of patient sociodemographic characteristics, health professional encounters, clinical events, symptoms and diagnoses. Negative binomial regression was used to model the likelihood of having a weight record each year, and Cox regression to the likelihood of repeated weight recording. RESULTS: A total of 14,049,871 weight records were identified in the EHR of 4,918,746 patients during the study period, representing 26,998,591 person-years of observation. Around a third of patients had a weight record each year. Forty-nine percent of weight records were repeated within a year with an average time to a repeat weight record of 1.92 years. Weight records were most often taken by nursing staff (38-42%) and GPs (37-39%) as part of a routine clinical care, such as chronic disease reviews (16%), medication reviews (6-8%) and health checks (6-7%), or were associated with consultations for contraception (5-8%), respiratory disease (5%) and obesity (1%). Patient characteristics independently associated with an increased likelihood of weight recording were as follows: female sex, younger and older adults, non-drinkers, ex-smokers, low or high BMI, being more deprived, diagnosed with a greater number of comorbidities and consulting more frequently. The effect of policy-level incentives to record weight did not appear to be sustained after they were removed. CONCLUSION: Weight recording is not a routine activity in UK primary care. It is recorded for around a third of patients each year and is repeated on average every 2 years for these patients. It is more common in females with higher BMI and in those with comorbidity. Incentive payments and their removal appear to be associated with increases and decreases in weight recording.

Communication practices for delivering health behaviour change conversations in primary care: a systematic review and thematic synthesis.

BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines exhort clinicians to encourage patients to improve their health behaviours. However, most offer little support on how to have these conversations in practice. Clinicians fear that health behaviour change talk will create interactional difficulties and discomfort for both clinician and patient. This review aims to identify how healthcare professionals can best communicate with patients about health behaviour change (HBC). METHODS: We included studies which used conversation analysis or discourse analysis to study recorded interactions between healthcare professionals and patients. We followed an aggregative thematic synthesis approach. This involved line-by-line coding of the results and discussion sections of included studies, and the inductive development and hierarchical grouping of descriptive themes. Top-level themes were organised to reflect their conversational positioning. RESULTS: Of the 17,562 studies identified through systematic searching, ten papers were included. Analysis resulted in 10 top-level descriptive themes grouped into three domains: initiating; carrying out; and closing health behaviour change talk. Of three methods of initiation, two facilitated further discussion, and one was associated with outright resistance. Of two methods of conducting behaviour change talk, one was associated with only minimal patient responses. One way of closing was identified, and patients did not seem to respond to this positively. Results demonstrated a series of specific conversational practices which clinicians use when talking about HBC, and how patients respond to these. Our results largely complemented clinical guidelines, providing further detail on how they can best be delivered in practice. However, one recommended practice - linking a patient's health concerns and their health behaviours - was shown to receive variable responses and to often generate resistance displays. CONCLUSIONS: Health behaviour change talk is smoothly initiated, conducted, and terminated by clinicians and this rarely causes interactional difficulty. However, initiating conversations by linking a person's current health concern with their health behaviour can lead to resistance to advice, while other strategies such as capitalising on patient initiated discussions, or collaborating through question-answer sequences, may be well received.

The equity impact of brief opportunistic interventions to promote weight loss in primary care: secondary analysis of the BWeL randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend that clinicians should make brief opportunistic behavioural interventions to patients who are obese to increase the uptake of effective weight loss programmes. The objective was to assess the effect of this policy on socioeconomic equity. METHODS: One thousand eight hundred eighty-two consecutively attending patients with obesity and who were not seeking support for weight loss from their GP were enrolled in a trial. Towards the end of each consultation, GPs randomly assigned participants to one of two 30-s interventions. In the active intervention (support arm), the GP offered referral to a weight management group. In the control intervention (advice arm), the GP advised the patient that their health would benefit from weight loss. Agreement to attend a behavioural weight loss programme, attendance at the programme and weight loss at 12 months were analysed by socioeconomic status, measured by postcode using the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD). RESULTS: Mean weight loss was 2.43 kg (sd 6.49) in the support group and 1.04 kg (sd 5.50) for the advice only group, but these effects were moderated by IMD (p = 0.039 for the interaction). In the support arm, weight loss was greater in higher socioeconomic groups. Participants from lower socioeconomic backgrounds were more likely to accept the offer and equally likely to attend a weight loss referral but attended fewer sessions. Adjusting for these sequentially reduced the gradient for the association of socioeconomic status with weight loss from + 0.035 to - 0.001 kg/IMD point. In the advice only arm, 10% took effective action to promote weight loss. The decision to seek support for weight loss outside of the trial did not differ by socioeconomic status, but weight loss among deprived participants who used external support was greater than among more affluent participants (p = 0.025). CONCLUSION: Participants' responses to GPs' brief opportunistic interventions to promote weight loss differed by socioeconomic status and trial arm. In the support arm, more deprived people lost less weight because they attended fewer sessions at the programme. In the advice arm, more deprived people who sought and paid for support for weight loss themselves lost more weight than more affluent people who sought support. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN26563137 . Date of registration: January 3, 2013; date of first participant recruited: June 4, 2014.

Prevention and reversal of Type 2 diabetes: highlights from a symposium at the 2019 Diabetes UK Annual Professional Conference.

AIM: This symposium covers the gamut of Type 2 diabetes prevention, reversing established Type 2 diabetes, population-level delivery of weight loss programmes and personal insights into achieving and retaining substantial weight loss. RESULTS: The NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme was launched in 2016 and rates of referral and attendance have both exceeded expectations. By March 2018, mean weight loss for completers (those attending more than 60% of sessions) was 3.2 kg reflecting considerable health benefits. Established Type 2 diabetes is now known to be a reversible condition in the early years, and the underlying mechanism is the removal of the excess fat from within liver and pancreas in these susceptible individuals. The Diabetes Remission Clinical Trial has shown that around half of a primary care population of people with Type 2 diabetes of less than 6 years' duration can be returned to non-diabetic blood glucose control which lasts at least 12 months. This raises the question of population-level intervention to achieve weight loss. The success of some mass weight loss programmes requires to be recognized. Reframing mass provision of weight loss support should be a vital part of our clinical strategy to prevent and treat Type 2 diabetes. However, the current obesogenic environment is a reality in which individuals must live. A personal account of achieving substantial and maintaining substantial weight loss provides an invaluable insight into practical problems encountered. All health professionals dealing with weight control should assimilate and reflect upon this understanding. CONCLUSIONS: Effective prevention and long term reversal of Type 2 diabetes is feasible. The impact upon the individual must be considered during delivery of advice and support.

Weight loss as a predictor of cancer and serious disease in primary care: an ISAC-approved CPRD protocol for a retrospective cohort study using routinely collected primary care data from the UK.

BACKGROUND: Unexpected weight loss is a symptom of serious disease in primary care, for example between 1 in 200 and 1 in 30 patients with unexpected weight loss go on to develop cancer. However, it remains unclear how and when general practitioners (GPs) should investigate unexpected weight loss. Without clarification, GPs may wait too long before referring (choosing to watch and wait and potentially missing a diagnosis) or not long enough (overburdening hospital services and exposing patients to the risks of investigation). The overall aim of this study is to provide the evidence necessary to allow GPs to more effectively manage patients with unexpected weight loss. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis of UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) data to: (1) describe how often in UK primary care the symptom of reported weight loss is coded, when weight is measured, and how GPs respond to a patient attending with unexpected weight loss; (2) identify the predictive value of recorded weight loss for cancer and serious disease in primary care, using cumulative incidence plots to compare outcomes between subgroups and Cox regression to explore and adjust for covariates. Preliminary work in CPRD estimates that weight loss as a symptom is recorded for approximately 148,000 eligible patients > 18 years and is distributed evenly across decades of age, providing adequate statistical power and precision in relation to cancer overall and common cancers individually. Further stratification by cancer stage will be attempted but may not be possible as not all practices within CPRD are eligible for cancer registry linkage, and staging information is often incomplete. The feasibility of using multiple imputation to address missing covariate values will be explored. DISCUSSION: This will be the largest reported retrospective cohort of primary care patients with weight measurements and unexpected weight loss codes used to understand the association between weight measurement, unexpected weight loss, and serious disease including cancer. Our findings will directly inform international guidelines for the management of unexpected weight loss in primary care populations.

Smoking cessation and survival in lung, upper aero-digestive tract and bladder cancer: cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The aim was to examine the association between smoking cessation and prognosis in smoking-related cancer as it is unclear that cessation reduces mortality. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study from 1999 to 2013, we assessed the association between cessation during the first year after diagnosis and all-cause and cancer-specific mortality. RESULTS: Of 2882 lung, 757 upper aero-digestive tract (UAT) and 1733 bladder cancer patients 27%, 29% and 21% of lung, UAT and bladder cancer patients quit smoking. In lung cancer patients that quit, all-cause mortality was significantly lower (HR: 0.82 (0.74-0.92), while cancer-specific mortality (HR: 0.89 (0.76-1.04) and death due to index cancer (HR: 0.90 (0.77-1.05) were non-significantly lower. In UAT cancer, all-cause mortality (HR: 0.81 (0.58-1.14), cancer-specific mortality (HR: 0.84 (0.48-1.45), and death due to index cancer (HR: 0.75 (0.42-1.34) were non-significantly lower. There was no evidence of an association between quitting and mortality in bladder cancer. The HRs were 1.02 (0.81-1.30) for all-cause, 1.23 (0.81-1.86) for cancer specific, and 1.25 (0.71-2.20) for death due to index cancer. These showed a non-significantly lower risk in sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: People with lung and possibly UAT cancer who quit smoking have a lower risk of mortality than people who continue smoking.

Cognitive and behavioural strategies for self-directed weight loss: systematic review of qualitative studies.

AIM: We conducted a systematic review of qualitative studies to examine the strategies people employ as part of self-directed weight loss attempts, map these to an existing behaviour change taxonomy and explore attitudes and beliefs surrounding these strategies. METHODS: Seven electronic databases were searched in December 2015 for qualitative studies in overweight and obese adults attempting to lose weight through behaviour change. We were interested in strategies used by participants in self-directed efforts to lose weight. Two reviewers extracted data from included studies. Thematic and narrative synthesis techniques were used. RESULTS: Thirty one studies, representing over 1,000 participants, were included. Quality of the included studies was mixed. The most commonly covered types of strategies were restrictions, self-monitoring, scheduling, professional support and weight management aids. With the exception of scheduling, for which participant experiences were predominantly positive, participants' attitudes and beliefs surrounding implementation of these groups of strategies were mixed. Two new groups of strategies were added to the existing taxonomy: reframing and self-experimentation. CONCLUSIONS: This review demonstrates that at present, interventions targeting individuals engaged in self-management of weight do not necessarily reflect lived experiences of self-directed weight loss.

Factors associated with study attrition in a pilot randomised controlled trial to explore the role of exercise-assisted reduction to stop (EARS) smoking in disadvantaged groups.

BACKGROUND: Study attrition has the potential to compromise a trial's internal and external validity. The aim of the present study was to identify factors associated with participant attrition in a pilot trial of the effectiveness of a novel behavioural support intervention focused on increasing physical activity to reduce smoking, to inform the methods to reduce attrition in a definitive trial. METHODS: Disadvantaged smokers who wanted to reduce but not quit were randomised (N = 99), of whom 61 (62 %) completed follow-up assessments at 16 weeks. Univariable logistic regression was conducted to determine the effects of intervention arm, method of recruitment, and participant characteristics (sociodemographic factors, and lifestyle, behavioural and attitudinal characteristics) on attrition, followed by multivariable logistic regression on those factors found to be related to attrition. RESULTS: Participants with low confidence to quit, and who were undertaking less than 150 mins of moderate and vigorous physical activity per week at baseline were less likely to complete the 16-week follow-up assessment. Exploratory analysis revealed that those who were lost to follow-up early in the trial (i.e., by 4 weeks), compared with those completing the study, were younger, had smoked for fewer years and had lower confidence to quit in the next 6 months. Participants who recorded a higher expired air carbon monoxide reading at baseline were more likely to drop out late in the study, as were those recruited via follow-up telephone calls. Multivariable analyses showed that only completing less than 150 mins of physical activity retained any confidence in predicting attrition in the presence of other variables. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate that those who take more effort to be recruited, are younger, are heavier smokers, have less confidence to quit, and are less physically active are more likely to withdraw or be lost to follow-up.

Recent trends in weight loss attempts: repeated cross-sectional analyses from the health survey for England.

BACKGROUND: Public policies and clinical guidelines encourage people to achieve and maintain a healthy weight and societal culture, especially among women who tend to idealise thinness. OBJECTIVES: To examine trends over time in the prevalence of weight loss attempts in England (1997-2013) and to investigate if the characteristics associated with attempts to lose weight have changed. METHODS: Observational study using nationally representative data on adults ⩾18 years who participated in the Health Survey for England (HSE) in 1997 (n=8066), 1998 (n=14 733), 2002 (n=8803), 2012 (n=7132) and 2013 (n=7591), with self-reported attempts to lose weight, cardiovascular disease (CVD) events or medications and measured height, weight and blood pressure. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the association between weight loss attempts and survey year, socio-demographic variables and health status. RESULTS: The age-standardised prevalence of weight loss attempts in the English population increased from 39% in 1997 to 47% in 2013. In 2013, 10% of those with BMI <22; 30% with BMI ⩾22 to <25; 53% with BMI ⩾25 to <30; and 76% with BMI ⩾30 were trying to lose weight. The odds of trying to lose weight increased linearly with each year: odds ratio (OR) 1.021 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.018-1.024) and 1.024 (95% CI 1.008-1.039) after adjustment for changes in BMI and population characteristics. The biggest predictors of weight loss attempts were being in the overweight/obese categories: 5.42 (95% CI 5.05-5.81) and 12.68 (95% CI 11.52-13.96), respectively; and among women: 3.01 (95% CI 2.85-3.18). Having a BMI >25 and a CVD-related condition was associated with only a small increase in the odds of trying to lose weight. There was no evidence that these predictors changed over time. CONCLUSIONS: More people are making weight loss attempts each year across all BMI categories. Having a health condition that would improve with weight loss was only very modestly associated with an increase in reported weight loss attempts, which reinforces data that suggests people's prime motivation to lose weight is unrelated to health.

Clinical effectiveness of very-low-energy diets in the management of weight loss: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

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.

Feasibility and acceptability of regular weighing, setting weight gain limits and providing feedback by community midwives to prevent excess weight gain during pregnancy: randomised controlled trial and qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Regular weighing in pregnant women is not currently recommended in many countries but has been suggested to prevent excessive gestational weight gain. This study aimed to establish the feasibility and acceptability of incorporating regular weighing, setting maximum weight gain targets and feedback by community midwives. METHODS: Low risk pregnant women cared for by eight community midwives were randomised to usual care or usual care plus the intervention at 10-14 weeks of pregnancy. The intervention involved community midwives weighing and plotting weight on a weight gain chart, setting weight gain limit targets, giving brief feedback at each antenatal appointment and encouraging women to weigh themselves weekly between antenatal appointments. Women and midwives were interviewed about their views of the intervention. The focus of the study was on process evaluation. RESULTS: Community midwives referred 123 women and 115 were scheduled for their dating scan within the study period. Of these, 84/115 were approached at their dating scan and 76/84 (90.5 %) randomised. Data showed a modest difference favouring the intervention group in the percentage of women gaining excessive gestational weight (23.5 % versus 29.4 %). The intervention group consistently reported smaller increases in depression and anxiety scores throughout pregnancy compared with usual care. Most women commented the intervention was useful in encouraging them to think about their weight and believed it should be part of routine antenatal care. Community midwives felt the intervention could be implemented within routine care without adding substantially to consultation length, thus not perceived as adding substantially to their workload. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention was feasible and acceptable to pregnant women and community midwives and was readily implemented in routine care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN81605162.

Cluster analysis of behavioural weight management strategies and associations with weight change in young women: a longitudinal analysis.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Maintaining a healthy weight is important for the prevention of many chronic diseases. Little is known about the strategies used by young women to manage their weight, or the effectiveness of these in preventing weight gain. We aimed to identify clusters of weight control strategies used by women and to determine the average annual weight change among women in each cluster from 2000 to 2009. METHODS: Latent cluster analysis of weight control strategies reported by 8125 participants in the Australian Longitudinal Study of Women's Health. Analyses were performed in March-November 2014. RESULTS: Weight control strategies were used by 79% of the women, and four unique clusters were found. The largest cluster group (39.7%) was named dieters as 90% had been on a diet in the past year, and half of these women had lost 5 kg on purpose. Women cut down on size of meals, fats and sugars and took part in vigorous physical activity. Additionally 20% had used a commercial programme. The next largest cluster (30.2%) was the healthy living group who followed the public health messages of 'eat less and move more'. The do nothing group (20%) did not actively control their weight whereas the perpetual dieters group (10.7%) used all strategies, including unhealthy behaviours. On average women gained 700 g per year (over 9 years); however, the perpetual dieters group gained significantly more weight (210 g) than the do nothing group (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Most women are actively trying to control their weight. The most successful approach was to follow the public health guidelines on health eating and physical activity.

Effectiveness of regular weighing, weight target setting and feedback by community midwives within routine antenatal care in preventing excessive gestational weight gain: randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Many pregnant women gain excess weight during pregnancy which increases the health risks to the mother and her baby. Interventions to prevent excess weight gain need to be given to the whole population to prevent excess weight gain. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of a simple and brief intervention embedded withinroutine antenatal care to prevent excessive gestation weight gain. METHODS: Six hundred and ten pregnant women (between 10-14 weeks gestation), aged ≥18 years with a body mass index (BMI) ≥18.5 kg/m2, planned to receive community midwife led care or shared care at the time of recruitment are eligible to take part in the study. Women will be recruited from four maternity centres in England. Community midwives complete a short training module before delivering the intervention. In the intervention, midwives weigh women, set maximum weight limits for weight gain at each antenatal appointment and ask women to monitor their weight at home. Themaximum weight limit is adjusted by the midwife at each antenatal appointment if women have exceeded their maximum weight gain limit set at their previous appointment. The intervention will be compared with usual antenatal care. The primary outcome is the proportion of women per group who exceed the Institute of Medicine guidelines for gestational weight gain at 38 weeks of pregnancy according to their early pregnancy BMI category. DISCUSSION: The proposed trial will test a brief intervention comprising regular weighing, target setting and monitoring ofweight during pregnancy that can be delivered at scale as part of routine antenatal care. Using the professional expertise of community midwives, but without specialist training in weight management, the intervention will incur minimal additionalhealthcare costs, and if effective at reducing excess weight gain, is likely to be very cost effective. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current controlled trials ISRCTN67427351. Date assigned 29/10/2014.

Behavioural weight management programmes for adults assessed by trials conducted in everyday contexts: systematic review and meta-analysis.

This systematic review and meta-analysis of effectiveness trials comparing multicomponent behavioural weight management programmes with controls in overweight and obese adults set out to determine the effectiveness of these interventions implemented in routine practice. To be included, interventions must have been multicomponent, delivered by the therapists who would deliver the intervention in routine practice and in that same context, and must be widely available or feasible to implement with little additional infrastructure or staffing. Searches of electronic databases were conducted, and augmented by screening reference lists and contacting experts (November 2012). Data were extracted by two reviewers, with mean difference between intervention and control for 12-month change in weight, blood pressure, lipids and glucose calculated using baseline observation carried forward. Data were also extracted on adverse events, quality of life and mood measures. Although there were many published efficacy trials, only eight effectiveness trials met the inclusion criteria. Pooled results from five study arms providing access to commercial weight management programmes detected significant weight loss at 12 months (mean difference -2.22 kg, 95% confidence interval [CI] -2.90 to -1.54). Results from two arms of a study testing a commercial programme providing meal replacements also detected significant weight loss (mean difference -6.83 kg, 95% CI -8.39 to -5.26). In contrast, pooled results from five interventions delivered by primary care teams showed no evidence of an effect on weight (mean difference -0.45 kg, 95% CI -1.34 to 0.43). One study testing an interactive web-based intervention detected a significant effect in favour of the intervention at 12 months, but the study was judged to be at high risk of bias and the effect did not persist at 18 months. Few studies reported other outcomes, limiting comparisons between interventions. Few trials have examined the effectiveness of behavioural weight loss programmes delivered in everyday contexts. These trials suggest that commercial interventions delivered in the community are effective for achieving weight loss. There is no evidence that interventions delivered within primary care settings by generalist primary care teams trained in weight management achieve meaningful weight loss.