Search

Obesity is a chronic disease that poses serious health and societal burdens. Although guidelines exist for obesity management in primary care, evaluating the success of obesity treatment programs is hampered by lack of established, robust quality measures. This study aimed to develop, and test for feasibility, measures for operational tracking, quality performance, and patient-centered care in the context of a national collaborative to develop a model for obesity management in the US primary care setting. The authors developed and evaluated 7 measures used to track the care of patients with overweight or obesity (n = 226,727 at baseline) receiving care within 10 health care organizations (HCOs). Measure categories included: (1) operational tracking (obesity/overweight prevalence and prevalence of obesity-related complications); (2) quality performance (obesity diagnosis, change in weight over time, anti-obesity medication prescriptions, and assessment of obesity-related complications); and (3) patient-centered care (patient-reported outcomes). Measures were tested for feasibility, variability across HCOs, ability to detect differences over time, and value to the HCOs. All measures were feasible to collect, provided value to the participating HCOs, and demonstrated variation and ability to detect differences over time (eg, rates of documented diagnosis of obesity classes 1, 2, and 3 increased from 29%, 46%, and 66%, respectively, at baseline to 35%, 53%, and 71% at study end). This study confirmed the feasibility and perceived value of 7 operational, performance, and patient-centered measures collected in primary care practices in 10 HCOs over an 18-month period.

Introduction Discussions of weight-management strategies between patients and healthcare providers can yield positive outcomes for people with overweight or obesity. Nonetheless, people with overweight or obesity encounter communication challenges and other barriers to pursuing effective weight-management strategies with their healthcare providers. The aim of this study was to develop a new self-completed assessment tool to initiate and facilitate conversations related to weight management between patients and healthcare providers. Methods Developing the assessment tool involved a series of steps and draft versions of the tool, based on feedback from key opinion leaders in the field of obesity (N = 4) and input from people with overweight or obesity (N = 18). Three iterative rounds of qualitative interviews were conducted in the USA. A targeted review of prior qualitative research was conducted to identify common and important impacts of obesity on patients’ functioning. Standard qualitative analytical methods were used to identify concepts of importance in a concept elicitation exercise during the interviews and were evaluated for potential inclusion in the tool. Potential problems with the tool were flagged during cognitive debriefing of the draft tool. Results During 18 individual interviews, participants referenced the impact of their weight on their lives, including health and comorbidities, physical function, emotional/mental functioning, social life, and physical appearance. Over the course of the tool’s development, 24 common and important impacts of obesity on patients’ functioning were reduced to a final set of eight concepts in the final tool that were deemed important and relevant to both patients and key opinion leaders. Conclusions The assessment tool is a five-item, self-completed measure expected to foster patient self-advocacy for individuals with overweight or obesity by giving them an opportunity to define their weight-management goals and discuss these, along with various medical interventions, with a healthcare provider.

OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to develop a simple and practical guide for discussing and managing obesity in primary care settings. METHODS This study convened representatives from 12 primary care and obesity specialty organizations for a series of roundtable meetings to discuss the key components of obesity treatment in primary care. Attendees identified the need for a guide for primary care providers that outlined the key steps for discussing obesity with patients and managing their care while recognizing the significant time constraints on such provider/patient encounters. RESULTS Prevailing themes from the roundtable sessions suggested that the key components of addressing obesity in primary care settings are obtaining patient permission, addressing weight bias, providing a diagnosis, and emphasizing shared decision-making. A modified "6A" framework with the steps "Ask," "Assess," "Advise," "Agree," "Assist," and "Arrange" was deemed appropriate to organize the process of weight management in primary care. An algorithm was developed to provide a script for the patient/provider encounter. CONCLUSIONS The expert panel developed a short, accessible, practical, and informative guide for obesity management by primary care clinicians. Efforts are under way to disseminate the guide to primary care providers through the 11 participating organizations that have endorsed it.

Background The ACTION study identified barriers to initiating and maintaining weight loss in patients with obesity; however, joint-related issues (pain, mobility and bleeding) may affect perceptions of patients with haemophilia and obesity (PwHO). Aim To identify patient and caregiver insights on the unique challenges of PwHO. Methods Following IRB approval, adults who self-identified as PwHO, spouses/partners of adult PwHO, and caregivers of adolescent PwHO (aged 12-17 years) completed an online survey between December 2017 and April 2018. Results Respondents included 124 adult PwHO, 45 spouses/partners and 42 caregivers. By calculated BMI, most adults were overweight (43%) or had obesity (51%); this differed from self-reported weight category. PwHO goals were improving health conditions (60%), having more energy (54%), reducing risks of weight (46%), and losing any weight (44%). Issues related to joint health were secondary for PwHO but frequently reported by spouses/parents. Most perceived weight loss to be a high priority (66%) and their responsibility (64%) but required a complete lifestyle change (63%). Most anticipated that weight loss would reduce joint pain (62%), bleeding (58%) and factor use (52%) and increase mobility (62%). Weight discussions with healthcare providers (HCPs) were commonly reported (51%). HCP discussions targeted improving health conditions (46%), achieving any weight loss (44%), being more active (73%) and improving eating habits (72%). Most PwHO (65%) perceived obesity as a disease and believe that 10% weight loss would be extremely beneficial (78%). In the past 5 years, 80% discussed being overweight and 68% losing weight; a minority reported being successful (9%) or somewhat successful (38%) with weight loss. More realistic or specific (51%/47%) goals, resources (46%), referrals to weight-loss programmes (41%) or dietitians (38%), meals or recipes (54%/50%), local or national (42%/41%) programmes for PwHO and success stories of PwHO (40%) are needed or would be helpful. Conclusions PwHO, spouse/partners and caregivers exhibited awareness of general and haemophilia-specific consequences of excess body weight. Most have tried general approaches to improve eating and increase activity with little success and desire more education on weight management and more details on specific actionable recommendations distributed through existing haemophilia channels. These insights will better inform the creation of weight-loss programmes for this community.

In 2016, the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute funded the National Patient Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) Bariatric Study (PBS). Understanding the experience of postoperative patients was a key component of this study. Nine focus groups were conducted in Southern California, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, and Ohio and in a national advocacy conference for patients with obesity. Participants were identified and recruited in both clinical and community settings. Focus group transcripts were analyzed using an iterative inductive-deductive approach to identify global overarching themes. There were 76 focus group participants. Participants were mostly women (81.4%), had primarily undergone gastric sleeve (47.0%), were non-Hispanic white (51.4%), had some college education (44.3%), and made $100,000 annual income or less (65.7%). Qualitative findings included negative reactions patients received from friends, family, and co-workers once they disclosed that they had bariatric surgery to lose weight; and barriers to follow-up care included insurance coverage, emotional and situational challenges, and physical pain limiting mobility. These findings confirm the other qualitative findings in this area. The approach to bariatric surgery should be expanded to provide long-term comprehensive care that includes in-depth postoperative lifetime monitoring of emotional and physical health.

People with obesity commonly face a pervasive, resilient form of social stigma. They are often subject to discrimination in the workplace as well as in educational and healthcare settings. Research indicates that weight stigma can cause physical and psychological harm, and that affected individuals are less likely to receive adequate care. For these reasons, weight stigma damages health, undermines human and social rights, and is unacceptable in modern societies. To inform healthcare professionals, policymakers, and the public about this issue, a multidisciplinary group of international experts, including representatives of scientific organizations, reviewed available evidence on the causes and harms of weight stigma and, using a modified Delphi process, developed a joint consensus statement with recommendations to eliminate weight bias. Academic institutions, professional organizations, media, public-health authorities, and governments should encourage education about weight stigma to facilitate a new public narrative about obesity, coherent with modern scientific knowledge.

Importance Bariatric surgery can lead to substantial improvements in type 2 diabetes (T2DM), but outcomes vary across procedures and populations. It is unclear which bariatric procedure has the most benefits for patients with T2DM. Objective To evaluate associations of bariatric surgery with T2DM outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants This cohort study was conducted in 34 US health system sites in the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network Bariatric Study. Adult patients with T2DM who had bariatric surgery between January 1, 2005, and September 30, 2015, were included. Data analysis was conducted from April 2017 to August 2019. Interventions Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or sleeve gastrectomy (SG). Main Outcome and Measures Type 2 diabetes remission, T2DM relapse, percentage of total weight lost, and change in glycosylated hemoglobin (hemoglobin A1c). Results A total of 9710 patients were included (median [interquartile range] follow-up time, 2.7 [2.9] years; 7051 female patients [72.6%]; mean [SD] age, 49.8 [10.5] years; mean [SD] BMI, 49.0 [8.4]; 6040 white patients [72.2%]). Weight loss was significantly greater with RYGB than SG at 1 year (mean difference, 6.3 [95% CI, 5.8-6.7] percentage points) and 5 years (mean difference, 8.1 [95% CI, 6.6-9.6] percentage points). The T2DM remission rate was approximately 10% higher in patients who had RYGB (hazard ratio, 1.10 [95% CI, 1.04-1.16]) than those who had SG. Estimated adjusted cumulative T2DM remission rates for patients who had RYGB and SG were 59.2% (95% CI, 57.7%-60.7%) and 55.9% (95% CI, 53.9%-57.9%), respectively, at 1 year and 86.1% (95% CI, 84.7%-87.3%) and 83.5% (95% CI, 81.6%-85.1%) at 5 years postsurgery. Among 6141 patients who experienced T2DM remission, the subsequent T2DM relapse rate was lower for those who had RYGB than those who had SG (hazard ratio, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.67-0.84]). Estimated relapse rates for those who had RYGB and SG were 8.4% (95% CI, 7.4%-9.3%) and 11.0% (95% CI, 9.6%-12.4%) at 1 year and 33.1% (95% CI, 29.6%-36.5%) and 41.6% (95% CI, 36.8%-46.1%) at 5 years after surgery. At 5 years, compared with baseline, hemoglobin A1cwas reduced 0.45 (95% CI, 0.27-0.63) percentage points more for patients who had RYGB vs patients who had SG. Conclusions and Relevance In this large multicenter study, patients who had RYGB had greater weight loss, a slightly higher T2DM remission rate, less T2DM relapse, and better long-term glycemic control compared with those who had SG. These findings can help inform patient-centered surgical decision-making.

Although the deleterious effects of obesity have been well documented in terms of morbidity and mortality, less is known about what it is like to live with this complex and chronic disease. This study systematically reviewed and synthesized peer-reviewed studies relating to the lived experience of patients with obesity. A total of 12,388 records were screened, resulting in the inclusion of 32 final studies. Meta-ethnographic synthesis of these 32 studies generated five "third-order constructs" or themes: the development of obesity; a life limited; stigma, judgment, shame, and blame; treatment and; experiences of specific or minority groups. These constructs describe, from the patient's perspective, the factors associated with the development and maintenance of obesity; the effects of the disease on their day-to-day lives; the impact of the stigma and judgment many patients are subjected to; and their experience of accessing, or trying to access, treatment for their healthcare needs. This synthesis reveals the dearth of studies that focus solely on the experience of the patient and highlights the tendency for participant-informed, rather than participatory, methods in obesity research. It concludes with a call for further participatory research into the experiences of people living with obesity.