The impact of weight loss interventions on disordered eating symptoms in people with overweight and obesity: a systematic review & meta-analysis.

IF 10 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL EClinicalMedicine Pub Date : 2025-01-31 eCollection Date: 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.103049
Elena Tsompanaki, Dimitrios A Koutoukidis, Gina Wren, Heather Tong, Annika Theodoulou, Danni Wang, Rebecca J Park, Susan A Jebb, Paul Aveyard
{"title":"The impact of weight loss interventions on disordered eating symptoms in people with overweight and obesity: a systematic review & meta-analysis.","authors":"Elena Tsompanaki, Dimitrios A Koutoukidis, Gina Wren, Heather Tong, Annika Theodoulou, Danni Wang, Rebecca J Park, Susan A Jebb, Paul Aveyard","doi":"10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.103049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>It is unclear whether weight loss interventions worsen disordered eating in people living with overweight/obesity. We aimed to systematically evaluate the association between weight loss interventions and disordered eating.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Six databases were searched from inception until September 2024. Trials of weight loss interventions in people with overweight/obesity were included if they reported a validated score for disordered eating on either the Eating Disorder Examination Interview or the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire pre- and post-intervention. Interventions included behavioural weight loss programmes (BWL) and pharmacotherapy licenced for weight loss, with or without concurrent psychological support, provided for at least 4 weeks. Pooled standardised mean differences (SMD) in scores of disordered eating were calculated using random effects meta-analyses. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for randomised and single-arm trials, respectively (PROSPERO ID: CRD42023404792).</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Thirty-eight studies with 66 eligible arms (61 interventions: 29 BWL, 11 BWL + pharmacotherapy, 20 BWL + psychological intervention, 1 pharmacotherapy + psychological intervention) and 3364 participants in total were included. The mean weight change was -4.7 kg (95% CI: -5.7, -3.7). Compared with baseline, disordered eating scores improved by -1.47 SMD units (95% CI: -1.67, -1.27, p < 0.001, I<sup>2</sup> = 94%) at intervention completion (median of 4 months). Seven randomised trials that directly compared a weight loss intervention to no/minimal intervention reported an improvement of -0.49 SMD units (95% CI, -0.93, -0.04, p = 0.0035, I<sup>2</sup> = 73%). Sub-group analyses showed: (a) disordered eating scores improved more in people with an eating disorder at baseline compared with people without high scores, (b) no clear evidence that the association depended upon intervention type, and (c) disordered eating scores improved more in trials rated at low overall RoB.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>Despite heterogeneity in effect size, weight loss interventions consistently improved disordered eating scores. These findings provide reassurance that weight loss interventions might not worsen disordered eating and may improve it.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>Novo Nordisk UK Research Foundation Doctoral Fellowship in Clinical Diabetes.</p>","PeriodicalId":11393,"journal":{"name":"EClinicalMedicine","volume":"80 ","pages":"103049"},"PeriodicalIF":10.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11841075/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EClinicalMedicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.103049","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: It is unclear whether weight loss interventions worsen disordered eating in people living with overweight/obesity. We aimed to systematically evaluate the association between weight loss interventions and disordered eating.

Methods: Six databases were searched from inception until September 2024. Trials of weight loss interventions in people with overweight/obesity were included if they reported a validated score for disordered eating on either the Eating Disorder Examination Interview or the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire pre- and post-intervention. Interventions included behavioural weight loss programmes (BWL) and pharmacotherapy licenced for weight loss, with or without concurrent psychological support, provided for at least 4 weeks. Pooled standardised mean differences (SMD) in scores of disordered eating were calculated using random effects meta-analyses. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for randomised and single-arm trials, respectively (PROSPERO ID: CRD42023404792).

Findings: Thirty-eight studies with 66 eligible arms (61 interventions: 29 BWL, 11 BWL + pharmacotherapy, 20 BWL + psychological intervention, 1 pharmacotherapy + psychological intervention) and 3364 participants in total were included. The mean weight change was -4.7 kg (95% CI: -5.7, -3.7). Compared with baseline, disordered eating scores improved by -1.47 SMD units (95% CI: -1.67, -1.27, p < 0.001, I2 = 94%) at intervention completion (median of 4 months). Seven randomised trials that directly compared a weight loss intervention to no/minimal intervention reported an improvement of -0.49 SMD units (95% CI, -0.93, -0.04, p = 0.0035, I2 = 73%). Sub-group analyses showed: (a) disordered eating scores improved more in people with an eating disorder at baseline compared with people without high scores, (b) no clear evidence that the association depended upon intervention type, and (c) disordered eating scores improved more in trials rated at low overall RoB.

Interpretation: Despite heterogeneity in effect size, weight loss interventions consistently improved disordered eating scores. These findings provide reassurance that weight loss interventions might not worsen disordered eating and may improve it.

Funding: Novo Nordisk UK Research Foundation Doctoral Fellowship in Clinical Diabetes.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
减肥干预对超重和肥胖人群饮食失调症状的影响:一项系统综述和荟萃分析
背景:目前尚不清楚减肥干预是否会加重超重/肥胖人群的饮食失调。我们的目的是系统地评估减肥干预与饮食失调之间的关系。方法:检索自建库至2024年9月的6个数据库。在超重/肥胖人群中进行的减肥干预试验,如果他们在干预前和干预后的饮食失调检查访谈或饮食失调检查问卷中报告了有效的饮食失调得分,则纳入其中。干预措施包括行为减肥计划(BWL)和获得减肥许可的药物治疗,同时提供或不提供至少4周的心理支持。使用随机效应荟萃分析计算饮食失调评分的合并标准化平均差异(SMD)。分别使用随机试验和单臂试验的Cochrane RoB 2工具和Newcastle-Ottawa量表评估偏倚风险(RoB) (PROSPERO ID: CRD42023404792)。结果:共纳入38项研究,66个符合条件的组(61个干预措施:29个BWL, 11个BWL +药物治疗,20个BWL +心理干预,1个药物治疗+心理干预),共3364名受试者。平均体重变化为-4.7 kg (95% CI: -5.7, -3.7)。与基线相比,干预完成(中位4个月)时,饮食失调评分提高了-1.47个SMD单位(95% CI: -1.67, -1.27, p 2 = 94%)。7项随机试验直接比较了减肥干预与无干预/最小干预,结果显示改善了-0.49 SMD单位(95% CI, -0.93, -0.04, p = 0.0035, I2 = 73%)。亚组分析显示:(a)进食障碍患者的进食障碍得分在基线时比得分不高的人改善得更多,(b)没有明确的证据表明这种关联取决于干预类型,(c)进食障碍得分在总体RoB评分较低的试验中改善得更多。解释:尽管效应大小存在异质性,但减肥干预始终能改善饮食失调得分。这些发现让人们确信,减肥干预措施可能不会使饮食失调恶化,反而会改善它。资助:诺和诺德英国研究基金会临床糖尿病博士奖学金。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
EClinicalMedicine
EClinicalMedicine Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
18.90
自引率
1.30%
发文量
506
审稿时长
22 days
期刊介绍: eClinicalMedicine is a gold open-access clinical journal designed to support frontline health professionals in addressing the complex and rapid health transitions affecting societies globally. The journal aims to assist practitioners in overcoming healthcare challenges across diverse communities, spanning diagnosis, treatment, prevention, and health promotion. Integrating disciplines from various specialties and life stages, it seeks to enhance health systems as fundamental institutions within societies. With a forward-thinking approach, eClinicalMedicine aims to redefine the future of healthcare.
期刊最新文献
Subsequent primary cancer risks for non-hereditary colorectal cancer survivors. Association and post-iliac vein stenting symptom improvement of postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome and orthostatic intolerance with pelvic venous disorders: two retrospective studies. Early recurrence and prognosis in patients undergoing resection of primary retroperitoneal sarcoma: an international, retrospective cohort study. Safety and pharmacokinetics of sulfasalazine and its metabolite sulfapyridine for treatment of preterm preeclampsia in Australia (SIP): an early phase, unblinded, single-arm, proof of concept clinical trial. Association of intraoperative dexamethasone administration with postoperative delirium and the role of hyperglycaemia: a retrospective cohort study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1