Methods: A prospective cohort study involving different populations within the Vidarbha regions of Maharashtra, India was conducted through camps organised from May 2009 to October 2015. A total of 568 serum samples were collected from high-risk people recruited as study cohorts based on inclusion criteria, additional risk factors and clinical symptoms. Samples were evaluated by indirect ELISA using the whole-cell antigens of B. abortus. The results were compared with the commercially available IgG detection ELISA kit to ascertain the specificity and sensitivity of the developed test.

Results: Fever, body ache, joint pain, lower back pain, loss of appetite and weight loss were major symptoms associated with the disease. With the cut-off of > 0.8, the positivity of brucellosis infection was at 12.32% (70/568) compared to 9.33% (53/568) as detected by the commercial kit. The in-house developed ELISA method yielded a sensitivity of 87.5% and specificity of 99.18% as compared to the commercial kits (sensitivity -80.30% and specificity -99.6%).

METHODS: A total of 322 participants from the MyBFF@home study completed the Newest Vital Sign (NVS) test at baseline. However, only data from 209 participants who completed the NVS test from baseline to WL intervention were used to determine the HL groups. Change of the NVS scores from baseline to WL intervention phase was categorized into two groups: those with HL improvement (increased 0.1 score and above) and those without HL improvement (no change or decreased 0.1 score and more). Independent variables in this study were change of energy intake, nutrient intake, physical activity, anthropometry measurements, and body composition measurements between baseline and WL intervention as well as between WL intervention and WL maintenance. An Independent sample t-test was used in the statistical analysis.

RESULTS: In general, both intervention and control participants have low HL. The study revealed that the intervention group increased the NVS mean score from baseline (1.19 scores) to the end of the WL maintenance phase (1.51 scores) compared to the control group. There was no significant difference in sociodemographic characteristics between the group with HL improvement and the group without HL improvement at baseline. Most of the dietary intake measurements at WL intervention were significantly different between the two HL groups among intervention participants. Physical activity and body composition did not differ significantly between the two HL groups among both intervention and control groups.

METHODS: Between June 2000 and June 2020, patients with a BMI ≥ 50 kg/m2 underwent either IGB insertion followed by LRYGB (two-stage group), or LRYGB as the definitive bariatric procedure (single-stage group) in our institution. The two-stage procedure was adopted for high risk individuals. Primary outcome measures were percentage total weight loss (%TWL) at 24 months, length of stay and postoperative morbidity. Propensity score analysis was used to account for differences between groups.

RESULTS: A total of 155 (mean age 42.9 years ± 10.60; mean BMI 54.6 kg/m2 ± 4.53) underwent either the two-stage (n = 30) or single-stage procedure (n = 125) depending on preoperative fitness. At 6 months following LRYGB, there was a significant difference in %TWL between the groups in a matched analysis (11.9% vs 23.7%, p < 0.001). At 24 months, there was no difference in %TWL (32.0% vs 34.7%, p = 0.13). Median hospital stay following LRYGB was 2.0 (1-4) days with the two-stage vs 2.0 (0-14) days for the single-stage approach (p = 0.75). There was also no significant difference in complication rates (p = 0.058) between the two groups.

METHODS: MyBFF@home intervention was a quasi-experimental study which involved 328 overweight and obese housewives aged 18-59 years old (Control group: 159, Intervention group: 169). Data of the control and intervention group (pre and post intervention who completed the body composition and blood pressure measurements were analysed. Body compositions were measured using the Body Impedance Analyser (InBody 720) and blood pressure (Systolic and Diastolic) was taken using the blood pressure monitoring device (Omron HEM 907) at baseline, 6 month and 12 month. Data analyses (Pearson's correlation test and ANOVA) were performed and analysed using SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 22.0.