Pilot evaluation of a behavioral weight loss program for adults with physical disabilities: State of Slim Everybody usability and feasibility.

Background: People with physical disabilities (PWD) have a higher prevalence of obesity than populations without disability, but most evidence-based weight loss programs have not included this population. The State of Slim (SOS) program is an evidence-based weight loss program that has demonstrated success in producing weight loss in populations without disability, but it has not been adapted for or evaluated in PWD. Methods: The SOS program was systematically adapted using the evidence-informed Guidelines, Recommendations, and Adaptations Including Disability (GRAIDs) framework. A total of 35 participants enrolled in the State of Slim Everybody program. The program was offered entirely online. Body weight, attendance, and food log completion were also tracked weekly. The program length was 16.5 h and included weekly group instruction, with optional one-on-one sessions provided upon request. Following completion, participants completed post-evaluation surveys on overall satisfaction with the program. The primary outcomes were program effectiveness (i.e., body weight), usability, and feasibility. Results: Thirty-two out of 35 participants completed the program, representing a retention rate of 91.4%. Average weight loss was 10.9% (9.9 ± 0.7 kg (t (31) = -13.3, p =< 0.0001)). On a 1 (dissatisfied/completely useless) to 5 (very satisfied/completely helpful) Likert scale, the average score for overall program satisfaction was 4.8 ± 0.1 and program helpfulness 4.6 ± 0.1. Conclusion: The State of Slim Everybody program demonstrated significant weight loss and good usability and feasibility in PWD. Existing adaptation frameworks can be used to create inclusive health promotion programs for adults with physical disabilities.

Improvements in nutrition knowledge among adults with physical disabilities: A program evaluation of the mindfulness, exercise, and nutrition to optimize resilience (MENTOR) program 2020-2021.

BACKGROUND: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) funds a quality improvement (QI) health promotion telewellness program for adults with physical disabilities. OBJECTIVE: The nutrition component of the parent program, Mindfulness, Exercise, and Nutrition to Optimize Resilience (MENTOR) program, from 2020 to 2021, was evaluated to assess changes in nutrition knowledge of people with physical disabilities. METHODS: This was a quasi-experimental program evaluation by pre-post survey of participating adults with physical disabilities. Participants attended weekly nutrition classes for eight weeks with optional one-on-one counseling with a Registered Dietitian. Participants completed pre-post General Nutrition Knowledge Questionnaire Revised (GNKQ-R) that were analyzed using paired t-tests. Participants were grouped into quartiles by pre-program GNKQ-R scores for additional comparisons. Program attendance and post-program feedback were also evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 286 participants completed the MENTOR program, and 31% (n = 89) completed pre-post questionnaires for data analysis. Mean pre-program GNKQ-R scores were 58.4 ± 15.1 and post scores were 64.4 ± 11.3, which demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in nutrition knowledge (p < .001). Ancillary analysis revealed that participants with the lowest quartile of pre-program nutrition knowledge had the greatest improvements in their post-GNKQ-R scores (Mean change 16.4 ± 13.9). Questionnaire data revealed participants' subjective knowledge changes and their feedback on the nutrition component of the program. CONCLUSIONS: The eight-week MENTOR program effectively improved nutrition knowledge among people with physical disabilities. This demonstrates the impact the program can have on individual knowledge levels. Additionally, these results support the implementation of the program to the broader population of people with disabilities.

Weight history of individuals with and without physical disability in the International Weight Control Registry.

Background: People with physical disabilities (PWD) have an increased risk of obesity and related comorbidities compared with people without physical disabilities (PWoD). Previously identified contributors to weight loss maintenance pose challenges to PWD. However, it is not known if PWD experience less success in weight management. Methods: Six hundred and nine participants in the International Weight Control Registry (IWCR) were eligible for this analysis (PWD, n = 174; PWoD, n = 435). Self-reported weight history metrics were compared using general linear models. Perceived weight history category was compared using Chi-squared tests. Importance of diet and physical activity strategies for weight management were compared using Wilcoxon rank-signed tests. Results: PWD reported higher current body mass index (BMI) (36.1 ± 0.7 vs. 31.0 ± 0.5; p < 0.0001) and more weight loss attempts (9.1 ± 0.7 vs. 7.1 ± 0.4; p = 0.01) than PWoD. Current weight loss percentage (PWD 13.0 ± 1.0; PWoD, 13.0 ± 0.6; p = 0.97) and weight loss category (χ 2 [3, N = 609] = 2.9057, p = 0.41) did not differ between the groups. There were no differences in any weight strategy between PWD who were successful and those who regained. Conclusions: PWD and PWoD in the IWCR achieved similar levels of weight maintenance success. However, higher BMI and more weight loss attempts suggest that PWD may face challenges with weight management. More research is needed to identify strategies leading to success for PWD.

Reliability and Validity of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire Adapted to Include Adults With Physical Disability.

BACKGROUND: People with physical disabilities (PWD) participate in less physical activity than people without physical disabilities (PWoD), which increases the risk for several negative health consequences. Comparing physical activity between PWD and PWoD remains a challenge since no reliable and valid survey exists to measure physical activity in both populations. The International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) was adapted to be inclusive of PWD using a recently developed survey adaption framework; however, the adapted IPAQ has not been assessed for reliability and validity. The objective of this study was to assess the reliability and validity of the adapted IPAQ. METHODS: To assess test-retest reliability, the adapted IPAQ was completed twice within a 72-hour period by 172 individuals (PWD: n = 102, PWoD: n = 70) and compared using intraclass correlation coefficients. Using Spearman rho, convergent validity and construct validity were assessed in 62 individuals by comparing the adapted IPAQ against the original instrument and activity monitor measured step count, respectively. RESULTS: The adapted IPAQ demonstrated moderate test-retest reliability, with intraclass correlation coefficients of total scores for the total sample of .690 (95% confidence interval [CI] .581-.770) and among subgroup analysis (PWD, .640, 95% CI, .457-.761; PWoD, .758, 95% CI, .610-.850). Correlation coefficients were also good for the assessment of convergent validity of total score (.727; 95% CI, .579-.829; P < .001). Construct validity assessment yielded moderate coefficient (.406; 95% CI, .166-.596; P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: The adapted IPAQ demonstrated acceptable reliability and validity and is appropriate for use in PWD and PWoD.

High- and normal-protein diets improve body composition and glucose control in adults with type 2 diabetes: a randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: Weight loss of ≥10% improves glucose control and may remit type 2 diabetes (T2D). High-protein (HP) diets are commonly used for weight loss, but whether protein sources, especially red meat, impact weight loss-induced T2D management is unknown. This trial compared an HP diet including beef and a normal-protein (NP) diet without red meat for weight loss, body composition changes, and glucose control in individuals with T2D. METHODS: A total of 106 adults (80 female) with T2D consumed an HP (40% protein) diet with ≥4 weekly servings of lean beef or an NP (21% protein) diet excluding red meat during a 52-week weight loss intervention. Body weight, body composition, and cardiometabolic parameters were measured before and after intervention. RESULTS: Weight loss was not different between the HP (-10.2 ± 1.6 kg) and NP (-12.7 ± 4.8 kg, p = 0.336) groups. Both groups reduced fat mass and increased fat-free mass percent. Hemoglobin A1c, glucose, insulin, insulin resistance, blood pressure, and triglycerides improved, with no differences between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of observed effects of dietary protein and red meat consumption on weight loss and improved cardiometabolic health suggests that achieved weight loss, rather than diet composition, should be the principal target of dietary interventions for T2D management.

Adapting an evidence-based physical activity questionnaire for people with physical disabilities: A methodological process.

BACKGROUND: Practitioners and researchers often adapt tools, practices, and programs to meet the needs of culturally diverse population groups, but do not consider populations with disability. While there is some research on guidelines for adapting evidence-based programs, there is no systematic process for adapting survey instruments. Rather than creating separate instruments for people with physical disabilities (PWD), it is critical that instruments are designed to capture data on people with and without disabilities for comparison purposes. Given the disproportionately high rates of physical inactivity and obesity in PWD, we developed a methodology to adapt an evidence-based physical activity instrument. OBJECTIVE: To create a methodology to adapt surveys to be inclusive of PWD and use the methodology to adapt an evidence-based physical activity survey. METHODS: A framework was developed to adapt a physical activity survey instrument (International Physical Activity Questionnaire, IPAQ) to be inclusive of PWD. The framework, referred to as SAVe-IT, includes five steps: Step 1) Select survey instrument to adapt; Step 2) Adapt the survey instrument; Step 3) Verify adaptations with experts; Step 4) Implement pilot test; Step 5) Test the tool to confirm reliability. RESULTS: The adapted IPAQ passed review by the expert panels and the pilot test (n = 20). Assessment of test-retest reliability (n = 30) yielded strong intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.950 for the total score for the whole sample, 0.950 for PWD (n = 15) and 0.952 for people without disability (n = 15). CONCLUSIONS: The SAVe-IT framework resulted in the successful adaptation of the IPAQ and can be used in populations with and without physical disabilities.

Secondary analysis of a university-based weight loss program in on-campus versus off-campus employees.

Introduction: Many barriers prevent individuals from regularly engaging in physical activity (PA), including lack of time and access to facilities. Providing free gym membership close to one's work may alleviate both time and financial barriers, increase PA, and result in greater weight loss. The purpose of this secondary analysis was to determine if gym usage, self-reported leisure PA, and weight loss differed between participants working on the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus (ON) versus working off-campus (OFF) during a 6-month weight loss trial. Methods: 117 adults (ON, n = 62; OFF, n = 55) with overweight or obesity received free gym memberships for the duration of trial. Average gym check ins/week, self-report leisure PA, weight, and fat and lean mass were compared between groups. Results: ON reported more check-ins than OFF (ON, 0.93 ± 0.16 times/week; OFF, 0.55 ± 0.10 times/week p = 0.038). Both groups reported increased leisure PA, with ON reporting more leisure PA than OFF at month 4. Both groups had reductions in weight and fat mass, which were similar between groups. Conclusion: Gym usage in both groups was low, suggesting that convenient and free gym access only marginally promoted use of provided facilities, likely having little additional impact on PA and weight change. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The parent trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02627105.

The Data Behind Popular Diets for Weight Loss.

Both scientific evidence and popular diet trends have sought to identify the ideal diet for weight loss with strategies focused on either restricting carbohydrates or fat. While there is a strong physiologic rationale for either carbohydrate restriction or fat restriction to achieve a calorie deficit needed for weight loss, evidence from randomized controlled trials suggest either type of diet is effective for weight loss. The level of adherence, rather than macronutrient content, is the driver of successful weight loss.

Do outcomes from a behavioral weight loss intervention differ in Alabama versus Colorado?

Background: There are well-established regional differences in obesity prevalence in the United States but relatively little is known about why or whether success in weight loss differs regionally. Objective: The objective of this study was to determine whether changes in body weight, engagement in physical activity (PA), and psychosocial factors differed in Alabama (AL) versus Colorado (CO) in response to a 16-week behavioral weight loss program. Design: This is an ancillary study to a weight loss intervention being conducted simultaneously in AL and CO with identical intervention content and delivery in 70 participants (n = 31 AL and n = 39 CO). Body weight, objective (accelerometry) PA, and responses to psychosocial questionnaires (reward-based eating, stress, social support) were collected at baseline and at Week 16. Results: There were no differences in percent weight loss between states (AL: 10.98%; CO: 11.675%, p = 0.70), and weights at Week 16 were not different for participants in AL and CO (AL: 101.54 ± 4.39 kg, CO: 100.42 ± 3.67 kg, p = 0.84). Accelerometry-derived step count, stepping time, and activity score were all greater at Week 16 for participants in AL compared to participants in CO. Hedonic eating scores were more favorable for participants in AL at baseline (AL: 24.08 ± 2.42; CO: 34.99 ± 2.12, p = 0.0023) and at Week 16 (AL: 18.62 ± 2.70; CO: 29.11 ± 2.19, p = 0.0023). Finally, participants in AL presented more favorable social support scores at Week 16 compared to participants in CO. Conclusions: Weight loss did not differ between states, suggesting that factors contributing to higher obesity rates in some regions of the United States may not be barriers to weight loss. Further, participants in AL experienced greater improvements in some factors associated with weight maintenance, indicating the need to study regional differences in weight loss maintenance. National Clinical Trial 03832933.