Comparison of In-Person and Online Motivational Interviewing-Based Health Coaching.

Health coaching is a common approach for promoting lifestyle changes, but little is known about the effectiveness of different delivery methods. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of in-person versus online health coaching when used as part of a facilitated behavior change program. To increase translatability, the study used a naturalistic design that enabled participants to self-select the coaching delivery method (Group) as well as the target behavior (diet, physical activity, or weight management). Regardless of group, participants were provided with a behavior-based monitoring device and guided to use it by the health coach. A sample of 92 adults participated and 86 completed pre-post evaluations to assess behavior change strategies and posttest outcome measurements for their specific goal. Two-way (Group × Time) analyses of variance were used to evaluate changes in behavioral strategies. Intent-to-treat regression analyses were used to compare postintervention outcomes for groups. The in-person group had significantly higher Healthy Eating Index scores than the online group ( p < .05), but nonsignificant group differences were observed for those targeting physical activity or weight change ( p > .05). The results support the use of health coaching for promoting behavior change and suggest that online coaching may be equally effective as in-person methods.

Comparative effectiveness of guided weight loss and physical activity monitoring for weight loss and metabolic risks: A pilot study.

Many consumer-based physical activity monitors (PAMs) are available but it is not clear how to use them to most effectively promote weight loss. The purpose of this pilot study was to compare the effectiveness of a personal PAM, a guided weight loss program (GWL), and the combination of these approaches on weight loss and metabolic risk. Participants completed the study in two cohorts: Fall 2010 and Spring 2011. A sample of 72 obese individuals in the Ames, IA area were randomized to one of 3 conditions: 1) (GWL, N = 31), 2) PAM, N = 29, or 3) a combination group (PAM + GWL, N = 29). Weight and metabolic syndrome score (MetS), computed from waist circumference (WC), BMI, blood pressure (BP), and lipids were assessed at baseline and following an 8-week intervention. Weight was also assessed four months later. Two-way (Group × Time) ANOVAs examined intervention effects and maintenance. Effect sizes were used to compare magnitude of improvements among groups. During the intervention, all groups demonstrated significant improvements in weight and MetS (mean weight loss = 4.16 kg, p < 0.001). Mean weight continued to decline modestly during follow-up, with average weight loss of 4.82 kg from baseline (p < 0.01). There were no group differences for weight loss but the PAM + GWL group had significantly larger changes in MetS score (d = 0.06-0.77). The use of PAM resulted in significant improvements in weight and MetS that were maintained across a four-month follow-up. Evidence suggests that the addition of GWL contributed to enhanced metabolic outcomes.