Background: Rural counties in the United States have higher rates of obesity, sedentary lifestyle, and associated chronic diseases than nonrural areas, yet the management of obesity in rural communities has received little attention from researchers.Methods: Obese women from rural communities who completed an initial 6-month weight-loss program at Cooperative Extension Service offices in 6 medically underserved rural counties (n = 234) were randomized to extended care or to an education control group. The extended-care programs entailed problem-solving counseling delivered in 26 biweekly sessions via telephone or face to face. Control group participants received 26 biweekly newsletters containing weight-control advice.Results: Mean weight at study entry was 96.4 kg. Mean weight loss during the initial 6-month intervention was 10.0 kg. One year after randomization, participants in the telephone and face-to-face extended-care programs regained less weight (mean [SE],1.2[0.7] and 1.2[0.6] kg, respectively) than those in the education control group (3.7[0.7] kg; P =.03 and .02, respectively). The beneficial effects of extended-care counseling were mediated by greater adherence to behavioral weight-management strategies, and cost analyses indicated that telephone counseling was less expensive than face-to-face intervention.Conclusions: Extended care delivered either by telephone or in face-to-face sessions improved the 1-year maintenance of lost weight compared with education alone. Telephone counseling constitutes an effective and cost-efficient option for long-term weight management. Delivering lifestyle interventions via the existing infrastructure of the Cooperative Extension Service represents a viable means of adapting research for rural communities with limited access to preventive health services.

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effects and costs of three doses of behavioral weight-loss treatment delivered via Cooperative Extension Offices in rural communities.Design and MethodsObese adults (N=612) were randomly assigned to low, moderate or high doses of behavioral treatment (i.e., 16, 32 or 48 sessions over two years) or to a control condition that received nutrition education without instruction in behavior modification strategies.ResultsTwo-year mean reductions in initial body weight were 2.9% (95% Credible Interval=1.7–4.3), 3.5% (2.0–4.8), 6.7% (5.3–7.9), and 6.8% (5.5–8.1) for the control, low, moderate, and high-dose conditions, respectively. The moderate-dose treatment produced weight losses similar to the high-dose condition and significantly larger than the low-dose and control conditions (posterior probability > .996). The percentages of participants who achieved weight reductions ≥ 5% at two years were significantly higher in the moderate-dose (58%) and high-dose (58%) conditions compared with low-dose (43%) and control (40%) conditions (posterior probability > .996). Cost-effectiveness analyses favored the moderate-dose treatment over all other conditions.ConclusionA moderate dose of behavioral treatment produced two-year weight reductions comparable to high-dose treatment but at a lower cost. These findings have important policy implications for the dissemination of weight-loss interventions into communities with limited resources.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00912652.

IMPORTANCE Lifestyle interventions for obesity produce reductions in body weight that can decrease risk for diabetes and cardiovascular disease but are limited by suboptimal maintenance of lost weight and inadequate dissemination in low-resource communities. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the effectiveness of extended care programs for obesity management delivered remotely in rural communities through the US Cooperative Extension System. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This randomized clinical trial was conducted from October 21, 2013, to December 21, 2018, in Cooperative Extension Service offices of 14 counties in Florida. A total of 851 individuals were screened for participation; 220 individuals did not meet eligibility criteria, and 103 individuals declined to participate. Of 528 individuals who initiated a 4-month lifestyle intervention, 445 qualified for randomization. Data were analyzed from August 22 to October 21, 2019. INTERVENTIONS Participants were randomly assigned to extended care delivered via individual or group telephone counseling or an education control program delivered via email. All participants received 18 modules with posttreatment recommendations for maintaining lost weight. In the telephone-based interventions, health coaches provided participants with 18 individual or group sessions focused on problem solving for obstacles to the maintenance of weight loss. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was change in body weight from the conclusion of initial intervention (month 4) to final follow-up (month 22). An additional outcome was the proportion of participants achieving at least 10% body weight reduction at follow-up. RESULTS Among 445 participants (mean [SD] age, 55.4 [10.2] years; 368 [82.7%] women; 329 [73.9%] white), 149 participants (33.5%) were randomized to individual telephone counseling, 143 participants (32.1%) were randomized to group telephone counseling, and 153 participants (34.4%) were randomized to the email education control. Mean (SD) baseline weight was 99.9 (14.6) kg, and mean (SD) weight loss after the initial intervention was 8.3 (4.9) kg. Mean weight regains at follow-up were 2.3 (95% credible interval [CrI], 1.2-3.4) kg in the individual telephone counseling group, 2.8 (95% CrI, 1.4-4.2) kg for the group telephone counseling group, and 4.1 (95% CrI, 3.1-5.0) kg for the education control group, with a significantly smaller weight regain observed in the individual telephone counseling group vs control group (posterior probability >.99). A larger proportion of participants in the individual telephone counseling group achieved at least 10% weight reductions (31.5% [95% CrI, 24.1%-40.0%]) than in the control group (19.1% [95% CrI, 14.1%-24.9%]) (posterior probability >.99).

Background A major challenge following successful weight loss is continuing the behaviors required for long-term weight maintenance. This challenge may be exacerbated in rural areas with limited local support resources. Objective This study describes and compares program costs and cost-effectiveness for 12-month extended care lifestyle maintenance programs following an initial 6-month weight loss program. Design A 1-year prospective controlled randomized clinical trial. Participants/Setting The study included 215 female participants age 50 or older from rural areas who completed an initial 6-month lifestyle program for weight loss. The study was conducted from June 1, 2003, to May 31, 2007. Intervention The intervention was delivered through local Cooperative Extension Service offices in rural Florida. Participants were randomly-assigned to a 12-month extended care program using either individual telephone counseling (n=67), group face-to-face counseling (n=74), or a mail/control group (n=74). Main Outcome Measures Program delivery costs, weight loss, and self-reported health status were directly assessed through questionnaires and program activity logs. Costs were estimated across a range of enrollment sizes to allow inferences beyond the study sample. Statistical Analyses Performed Non-parametric and parametric tests of differences across groups for program outcomes were combined with direct program cost estimates and expected value calculations to determine which scales of operation favored alternative formats for lifestyle maintenance. Results Median weight regain during the intervention year was 1.7 kg for participants in the face-to-face format, 2.1 kg for the telephone format, and 3.1 kg for the mail/control format. For a typical group size of 13 participants, the face-to-face format had higher fixed costs, which translated into higher overall program costs ($420 per participant) when compared to individual telephone counseling ($268 per participant) and control ($226 per participant) programs. While the net weight lost after the 12-month maintenance program was higher for the face-to-face and telephone programs compared to the control group, the average cost per expected kilogram of weight lost was higher for the face-to-face program ($47/kg) compared to the other two programs (approximately $33/kg for telephone and control). Conclusions Both the scale of operations and local demand for programs are important considerations in selecting a delivery format for lifestyle maintenance. In this study, the telephone format had a lower cost, but similar outcomes compared to the face-to-face format.

Obesity is a major contributor to the greater prevalence of chronic disease morbidity and mortality observed in rural versus nonrural areas of the U.S. Nonetheless, little research attention has been given to modifying this important driver of rural/urban disparities in health outcomes. Although lifestyle treatments produce weight reductions of sufficient magnitude to improve health, the existing research is limited with respect to the long-term maintenance of treatment effects and the dissemination of services to underserved populations. Recent studies have demonstrated the feasibility of delivering lifestyle programs through the infrastructure of the U.S. Cooperative Extension Service (CES), which has more than 2,900 offices nationwide and whose mission includes nutrition education and health promotion. In addition, several randomized trials have shown that supplementing lifestyle treatment with extended-care programs consisting of either face-to-face sessions or individual telephone counseling can improve the maintenance of weight loss. However, both options entail relatively high costs that inhibit adoption in rural communities. The delivery of extended care via group-based telephone intervention may represent a promising, cost-effective alternative that is well suited to rural residents who tend to be isolated, have heightened concerns about privacy, and report lower quality of life. The Rural Lifestyle Eating and Activity Program (Rural LEAP) is a randomized trial, conducted via CES offices in rural communities, targeted to adults with obesity (n=528), and designed to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of extended-care programs delivered via group or individual telephone counseling compared to an education control condition on long-term changes in body weight.