Search

Purpose: Individuals with obesity frequently regain weigh after endoscopic bariatric therapies (EBT) unless they adhere to healthy habits. The objective was to create and validate a short, self-administered questionnaire (EMOVE) to assess healthy dietary and physical activity (PA) habits' adherence to be used in clinical practice. Materials and Methods: In this prospective, unicentric study, 463 patients completed the short, Spanish EMOVE questionnaire, to be validated following the Medical Outcome Trust Criteria. Conceptual and measurement model, reliability (internal consistency and test–retest [subgroup of 93 patients]), construct validity, responsiveness, interpretability, and burden were evaluated. Patients enrolled from January 2017 through August 2018 and auto-filled the EMOVE at baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months. Results: Patients submitted to intragastric ballon for 6 and 12 months or POSE were 82.7% women with a mean age of 42.7 years, and a mean BMI of 37.1 kg/m2. Four factors were extracted with exploratory factor analysis related to intake frequency, portions and proportions, time and place of eating, and physical activity. EMOVE showed adequate internal consistency (α = 0.73), very good test–retest (r = 0.91, CI: 0.86–0.94; p < 0.001), moderate construct validity of dietary (r = 0.24, CI: 0.11–0.37, p < 0.001), and PA habits (r = 0.44, CI 0.30–0.58; p < 0.001). Stable responsiveness, with correlations from 0.29 to 0.39 (p < 0.001) between the EMOVE scores and the % of total weight loss at 3, 6, and 12 months. Participants categorized as having good or excellent habits (score ≥ 30 points) lost significantly more weight (p < 0.05). Finally, the administration burden was 2.96 min. Conclusion: The EMOVE is a useful tool in Spanish language to easily assess the level of adherence to healthy dietary and PA habits to be used routinely in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Four commercially available intragastric balloons have been used for the management of obesity and underwent randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and we aimed to compare them using a network meta-analysis approach.Methods: Several databases were queried from inception to May 26, 2017, and we included RCTs enrolling patients treated with Orbera, Heliosphere, ReShape Duo, and Obalon compared with another balloon, sham, or open-label control group. Two investigators independently abstracted data. A random effects frequentist network meta-analysis and relative ranking of agents using surface under the cumulative ranking probabilities were performed.Results: We included 15 trials at low risk of bias (only two were head-to-head). Compared to control groups, the two fluid-filled devices were associated with significant outcome (% total body weight loss) at 6 months: Orbera, 6.72% (95% CI, 5.55, 7.89) and ReShape Duo 4% (95% CI 2.69, 5.31). Only one of the two gas-filled devices was associated with significant outcome at 6 months: Obalon 3.3% (95% CI 2.30, 4.30), and not the second: Heliosphere 6.71% (95% CI − 0.82, 14.23). Fluid-filled devices had the highest likelihood of superiority in achieving the outcome at 6 months (96.8%) and at 12 months (96.6%). The quality of evidence was high for comparisons against control.Conclusions: Fluid-filled balloons are more likely to produce weight loss compared to gas-filled balloons or lifestyle intervention. However, they may be associated with a higher rate of intolerance and early removal. This information will aid clinicians in device selection and engaging patients in shared decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]