ABSTRACT
Background: A formula low-energy diet (LED) reduces weight effectively in obese patients with knee osteoarthritis, but the role of LED in long-term weight-loss maintenance is unclear.Objective: We aimed to determine the effect of intermittent LED compared with daily meal replacements on weight-loss maintenance and number of knee replacements over 3 y.Design: The design was a randomized trial with participants aged >50 y who had knee osteoarthritis and a body mass index [BMI (in kg/m2)] ≥30. Participants were recruited from the osteoarthritis outpatient clinic at Copenhagen University Hospital in Frederiksberg, Denmark; they had previously completed a 68-wk lifestyle intervention trial and achieved an average weight loss of 10.5 kg (10% of initial body weight). Participants were randomly assigned to either the intermittent treatment (IN) group with LED for 5 wk every 4 mo for 3 y or to daily meal replacements of 1-2 meals for 3 y [regular (RE) group]. Attention by dietitians and the amount of formula products were similar. Primary outcomes were changes in body weight and proportion of participants receiving knee replacements. Outcomes were analyzed on the intention-to-treat-population with the use of baseline-carried-forward imputation for missing data.Results: A total of 153 participants (means ± SDs: BMI: 33.3 ± 4.6; age: 63.8 ± 6.3 y; 83% women) were recruited between June and December 2009 and randomly assigned to the IN (n = 76) or RE (n = 77) group. A total of 53 and 56 participants, respectively, completed the trial. Weight increased by 0.68 and 1.75 kg in the IN and RE groups, respectively (mean difference: -1.06 kg; 95% CI: -2.75, 0.63 kg; P = 0.22). Alloplasty rates were low and did not differ (IN group: 8 of 76 participants; RE group: 12 of 77 participants; P = 0.35).Conclusions: After a mean 10% weight-loss and 1-y maintenance, additional use of daily meal replacements or intermittent LED resulted in weight-loss maintenance for 3 y. These results challenge the commonly held assumption that weight regain in the long term is inevitable. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00938808.
Subject(s)
Body Mass Index , Body Weight Maintenance , Caloric Restriction , Diet, Reducing/methods , Energy Intake , Obesity/diet therapy , Osteoarthritis, Knee/complications , Aged , Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee , Female , Food, Formulated , Humans , Life Style , Male , Meals , Middle Aged , Osteoarthritis, Knee/surgery , Weight Gain , Weight LossABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To compare results of obese patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) who, after an intensive weight loss regimen, received 1 year of either dietary support (D), a knee-exercise program (E), or "no attention" (C; control group). METHODS: We conducted a randomized, 2-phase, parallel-group trial. A total of 192 obese participants with knee OA were enrolled; the mean age was 62.5 years and 81% were women with a mean entry weight of 103.2 kg. In phase 1, all participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups and began a dietary regimen of 400-810 and 1,250 kcal/day for 16 weeks (2 8-week phases) to achieve a major weight loss. Phase 2 consisted of 52 weeks' maintenance in either group D, E, or C. Outcomes were changes from randomization in pain on a 100-mm visual analog scale, weight, and response according to the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology-Osteoarthritis Research Society International criteria. RESULTS: Mean weight loss for phase 1 was 12.8 kg. After 1 year on maintenance therapy, the D group sustained a lower weight (11.0 kg, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 9.0, 12.8 kg) than those in the E (6.2, 95% CI 4.4, 8.1 kg) and C (8.2, 95% CI 6.4, 10.1 kg) groups (P = 0.002 by analysis of covariance [ANCOVA]). Adherence was low in the E group. All groups had statistically significant pain reduction (D: 6.1; E: 5.6; and C: 5.5 mm) with no difference between groups (P = 0.98 by ANCOVA). In each group 32 (50%), 26 (41%), and 33 (52%) participants responded to treatment in the D, E, and C groups, respectively, with no statistically significant difference in the number of responders (P = 0.41). CONCLUSION: A significant weight reduction with a 1-year maintenance program improves knee OA symptoms irrespective of maintenance program.
Subject(s)
Caloric Restriction , Exercise Therapy , Knee Joint/physiopathology , Obesity/therapy , Osteoarthritis, Knee/therapy , Weight Loss , Aged , Analysis of Variance , Biomechanical Phenomena , Denmark , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Obesity/diagnosis , Obesity/physiopathology , Osteoarthritis, Knee/diagnosis , Osteoarthritis, Knee/physiopathology , Pain Measurement , Patient Compliance , Time Factors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Obese patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) are encouraged to lose weight to obtain symptomatic relief. Risk of vascular events is higher in people with OA compared to people without arthritis. Our aim in this randomized trial was to compare changes in cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk-factors, nutritional health, and body composition after 1-year weight-loss maintenance achieved by [D]diet, [E]knee-exercise, or [C]control, following weight loss by low-energy-diet. DESIGN AND METHODS: Obese individuals (n = 192, >50 years) with knee OA, 63 years (SD 6), weight 103.2 kg (15.0), body-mass index 37.3 kg/m(2) (4.8), were enrolled into a 68-week weight-loss trial. RESULTS: Mean changes in weight, in D, E, and C were -11.0, -6.3, and -8.3 kg (P = 0.002). Reduction in waist circumference in D, E, and C were -8.4, -4.6, and -7.0 cm (P = 0.007). D reduced waist circumference significantly more than E: -3.8 cm (95%CI -6.2 to -1.4; P = 0.0024). There was no difference between the groups in changes in CVD risk factors; blood pressure, triglycerides, and cholesterol. Nutritional health was improved in all groups. For markers of bone, no statistical difference was found between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Dietary support, or control, maintained improvements in cardiovascular risk factors to the same extent and none of the interventions had a detrimental effect on bone.
