An evaluation of a television-delivered behavioral weight loss program: Are the ratings acceptable?

Abstract

This is a critical abstract of an economic evaluation that meets the criteria for inclusion on NHS EED. Each abstract contains a brief summary of the methods, the results and conclusions followed by a detailed critical assessment on the reliability of the study and the conclusions drawn. Health technology Television delivery of a behavioural weight reduction programme. Type of intervention Treatment. Economic study type Cost-effectiveness analysis. Study population Of the 71 participants who attended the first session, 90.9% were female and 91.5% were Caucasian. Ages of participants ranged from 20 to 58, with a mean of 39.1 years. The patient population had the following characteristics: (a) between 18 and 60 years old, (b) at least 20% overweight based on the Metropolitan Height and Weight Tables (Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, 1983), (c) free of medical problems that might contraindicate participation in a behavioural weight reduction program containing an exercise component, (d) not currently on medication that might affect weight loss, and (e) not enrolled in another weight reduction programme. Setting Weight reduction clinic and television centre in the USA. Source of effectiveness data The evidence for final outcomes was derived from a single study. Link between effectiveness and cost data The costing was undertaken on the same patient sample as that used in the effectiveness study. Study sample Of the 150 eligible respondents, 77 agreed to participate after the initial orientation session and were randomly assigned to condition. Seventy-one attended the first treatment session, with 56 participating in one of the three treatment groups (videotaped = 13, television delivered = 14 and live contact = 18) and 15 serving as waiting-list control participants. It was not stated whether power calculations determined sample size. Thirty-four participants completed both 3-month and 15-month follow-up assessments. Three participants were excluded from follow-up assessment because of pregnancy. Three others were excluded because of medical problems that were unrelated to weight reduction.

Self‐help versus therapist‐led group cognitive‐behavioral treatment of binge eating disorder at follow‐up

“…In contrast to previous self-help programs that have relied solely on written self-help materials, this study also sought to incorporate videotape procedures to deliver psychoeducational information. This approach has been used successfully in the treatment of weight loss (Meyers, Graves, Whelan, & Barclay, 1996) but has not been evaluated in the treatment of eating disorders. Our initial study revealed that PSH and SSH produced similar results compared with group CBT and that all three conditions showed significantly greater improvement on measures of binge eating compared with a wait-list control group after 8 weeks (Peterson et al, 1998).…”

Obesity: Responding to the global epidemic.

“…The shortcoming of this approach is that participation in maintenance sessions declines over time Wing, Venditti, Jakicic, Polley, & Lang, 1998). Innovative approaches, including the use of the Internet and television, are needed to facilitate patients' participation in long-term care (Meyers, Graves, Whelan, & Barclay, 1996;Tate, Wing, & Winett, 2001).…”

A systematic review of interventions to improve health professionals’ management of obesity

“…As in an earlier review 12 , studies that provided data on long-term weight changes 20,25,27,30 showed that many participants re-gained weight over time. However, in most cases, weight did not return to baseline levels and participants generally weighed less than at the outset (with the exception of the ®ve year followup reported by Hakala 27 that indicated a modest weight increase for women relative to baseline).…”

“…Only ®ve studies had adequate duration of follow-up. 20,22,25,27,30 Four of the 12 studies reported interventions targeted at health professionals. One of these was essentially an organisational intervention encouraging shared care among health professionals.…”