METHODS: We recruited one hundred and ninety four overweight and obese (BMI>27.5 kg/m2) employees from a local university. They were randomly allocated to either Group Support Lifestyle Modification (GSLiM) (intervention)(n = 97) or dietary counseling (comparison)(n = 97). The GSLIM activities included self monitoring, cognitive-behaviour sessions, exercise as well as dietary change advocacy, which were conducted through seminars and group sessions over 24 weeks. The comparison group was given dietary counselling once in 12 weeks. Both groups were followed up for additional 12 weeks to check for intervention effect sustenance. Anthropometric and biochemical parameters were measured at baseline, 12, 24 and 36 weeks; while dietary intake, physical activities, psychological measures and quality of life measured at baseline, 24 and 36 weeks. Data analysis was conducted using ANOVA repeated measures with intention to treat principle.
RESULTS: The participants were predominantly women with mean (standard deviation) age of 40.5 (9.3) years. A total of 19.6% of the participants in GSLiM achieved 6% weight loss compared to 4.1% in the comparison group (Risk Ratio 4.75; 95% CI: 1.68, 13.45). At 24 weeks, the retention rate was 83.5% for GSLiM and 82.5% for comparison group. GSLiM participants also achieved significant improvement in total weight self-efficacy score, negative emotions and physical discomfort subscales, MDPSS friend subscale and all domains in quality of life. Participants in the comparison group experienced reduction in negative self-thoughts.
CONCLUSION: The GSLiM programme proved to be more effective in achieving targeted weight loss, improving weight self-efficacy, friend social support, and quality of life compared to dietary counseling.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials IRCT201104056127N1.
Methods: Thirteen focus group discussions involving 129 participants from a weight-loss intervention program were conducted within the first 1 month of recruitment. These discussions were moderated by two trained researchers in the Malay language and assisted by an interview guide. They were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. A thematic analysis was performed, and codes and themes from each discussion were constructed.
Results: The participants understood dieting with various meanings, including skipping meals and removing rice from daily diets. They applied numerous methods to lose weight and achieved various outcomes. Health and appearance, social support, and compliance with current trends were the factors motivating these participants to lose weight. Their determination to lose weight was limited by lack of self-control and motivation, experiences of unpleasant effects, influence on weight, and environmental and health factors.
Conclusion: Real-life weight loss experiences and perceptions provided relevant insights into current weight loss management strategies. Some of these issues and misunderstandings should be emphasized in weight loss strategies during health promotion.
METHODS: Data on 123 obese and overweight housewives in the intervention group from the MyBFF@home study were utilised. A validated Malaysian Malay version of Obesity Weight Loss Quality of Life (OWLQOL) questionnaire was administered at baseline and 6 months after intervention. Descriptive analysis, univariate analysis, paired t-test and multiple logistic regression were performed using SPSS Version 22.
RESULTS: Mean body mass index (BMI) was 31.5 kg/m2 (SD:4.13), with 51 participants classified as overweight (41.5%) while 72 were obese (58.5%). About 72% of the housewives experienced weight reduction (62% reduced weight less than 5% and 11% reduced weight more than 5% of their baseline weight). There was a significant improvement in HRQOL with a pre-intervention total mean score of 59.82 (SD: 26.60) and post-intervention of 66.13 (SD: 22.82), p-value weight 61.24 (SD: 27.32). There was no significant association between weight reduction and HRQOL improvement.
CONCLUSION: Weight loss intervention programme utilizing behavioural modification has led to a significant improvement in HRQOL among overweight and obese housewives.
METHODS: Cost-effectiveness analysis used decision tree and Markov models to estimate lifetime costs and health benefits from societal perspective, based on a cohort of 509 metabolic syndrome patients in Thailand. Data were obtained from published literatures and Thai database. Results were reported as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in 2014 US dollars (USD) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained with discount rate of 3%. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the influence of parameter uncertainty on the results.
RESULTS: The ICER of ultrasonography screening of 50-year-old metabolic syndrome patients with intensive weight reduction program was 958 USD/QALY gained when compared with no screening. The probability of being cost-effective was 67% using willingness-to-pay threshold in Thailand (4848 USD/QALY gained). Screening before 45 years was cost saving while screening at 45 to 64 years was cost-effective.
CONCLUSIONS: For patients with metabolic syndromes, ultrasonography screening for NAFLD with intensive weight reduction program is a cost-effective program in Thailand. Study can be used as part of evidence-informed decision making.
TRANSLATIONAL IMPACTS: Findings could contribute to changes of NAFLD diagnosis practice in settings where economic evidence is used as part of decision-making process. Furthermore, study design, model structure, and input parameters could also be used for future research addressing similar questions.
METHODS: A cost-utility analysis using a lifetime Markov model was conducted among Thai patients with NAFLD, from a societal perspective. Pioglitazone, vitamin E, a weight reduction program, and usual care were investigated, with the outcomes of interest being the number of cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) cases, life expectancy, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), lifetime costs, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.
RESULTS: When compared with usual care, a weight reduction program can prevent cirrhosis and HCC cases by 13.91% (95% credible interval [CrI] 0.97, 20.59) and 2.12% (95% CrI 0.43, 4.56), respectively; pioglitazone can prevent cirrhosis and HCC cases by 9.30% (95% CrI -2.52, 15.24) and 1.42% (95% CrI -0.18, 3.74), respectively; and vitamin E can prevent cirrhosis and HCC cases by 7.32% (95% CrI -4.64, 15.56) and 1.12% (95% CrI -0.81, 3.44), respectively. Estimated incremental life expectancy and incremental QALYs for all treatment options compared with usual care were approximately 0.06 years and 0.07 QALYs, respectively. The lifetime costs of both a weight reduction program and pioglitazone were less than usual care, while vitamin E was $3050 (95% CrI 2354, 3650). The weight reduction program dominated all other treatment options. The probability of being cost-effective in Thailand's willingness-to-pay threshold ($4546/QALY gained) was 76% for the weight reduction program, 22% for pioglitazone, 2% for usual care, and 0% for vitamin E.
CONCLUSIONS: A weight reduction program can prevent cirrhosis and HCC occurrences, and dominates all other treatment options. Pioglitazone and vitamin E demonstrated a trend towards decreasing the number of cirrhosis and HCC cases.