Role of spouse involvement in the behavioral treatment of overweight women.

Abstract

A neglected variabl-e in the search for factors that promote long-term weight loss is the influence of significant others. sixty-eight overweight \^romen \^/ere assigned to five treatment conditions: l_) cooperative spouse: spouses attended all therapy sessions with the subjects and were trained in model-ing, monitoring, and reinfoïcement techniques; 2) wives alone: subjects underwent the basic behavioralprogram by themselves; 3) nonparticipating spouse: spouses were told not to particpate in any way in the subjectsr behavioral program; 4) al-ternative treatment: subjects discussed personality dynamics and their rel-ationship to weight ross; and 5) d.elayed treatment control-.There were no significant differences in weight ross among any of the conditions at posttreatment. of the three behavioral-conditions, only the co-operative spouse cond.ition lost significantly more weight than the alternative treatment at the 3-,6-, and l-2-month follovr-ups; the nonparticipating spouse condition lost more weiqht than the alternative treatment at the final follow-up. The co-operative spouse condítion lost significantry more weight than the wives alone condiÈion at the l2-month fol-Io\d-up. Both the co-operative spouse and the nonparticipating spouse conditions maintained their weiqht Iosses at the final follow-up, while the wives alone condition regained some weight. The absence of significant differences between lþs çe-6nara-tive spouse and the nonparticipating spouse conditions suggests that insÈructing spouses not to saboÈage their wives' efforts may be as effective for long-term maintenanca aq e¡rìr¡alr¡ +-aining thixn to aid their wives. Pretreatment wej-ghts \^/ere negatively associated \nrith the weight reduction quotient at the 3-and 6-month foIlow-ups, while ¡:-i.;ì,:-: );1, the number of pounds overweight was negatively associated with the weight reduction quotient at the 6-month follow-up. Of the measures of behavior change, spouse support was positively associated with outcome at the 6-month follow-up. rt was al_so found that subiects who consumed a smaller nunber of calories rel-ative to their prescribed.

Family involvement in weight control, weight maintenance and weight-loss interventions: a systematic review of randomised trials

“…31 Four studies included a randomised waiting-list control group. 26,29,30,32,33 The remaining 12 studies had no control arm but compared two or more interventions. Mean sample size of studies was 52 (range 33-97).…”

“…[17][18][19][29][30][31][32][33][34] In 14 studies where gender was specified, at least 70% of index members were female subjects.…”

“…Eight interventions targeted both parents and child or a parent and child dyad. 4,15,16,[20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28] Seven interventions targeted married couples, [17][18][19][29][30][31]34 and one targeted the index member and a significant other, usually a spouse. [15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34] (e) Graded task, started with easy tasks 25,31,34 (f) Increasing skills: problem solving, decision making, goal format, social, 'task' relevant 4,16,18,19,[23][24][25]…”

Review: The treatment and prevention of obesity: a systematic review of the literature

“…The role of spouse involvement in the treatment of obesity using behavioural therapy in conjunction with a reduced calorie intake was examined by Pearce et al 33 Altogether there were ®ve treatment conditions. In the ®rst, the co-operative spouse group, spouses were asked to attend treatment sessions and to participate fully to help their partners lose weight.…”

When Goal Sharing Produces Support That Is Not Caring

“…Research suggests that controlling support from providers who lack expertise can be detrimental for achievement (Pearce et al, 1981;Tracey & Young, 2002). However, such support should impair achievement in part by prompting participants to disengage from their goal pursuit, which was not a highly viable option for recipient participants playing the 10-minute computer game in Study 1.…”