Impact of primary care exercise referral schemes on the health of patients with obesity.

IF 2.3 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Pragmatic and Observational Research Pub Date : 2017-09-21 eCollection Date: 2017-01-01 DOI:10.2147/POR.S118648
Helen M Parretti, Suzanne E Bartington, Tim Badcock, Lucy Hughes, Joan L Duda, Kate Jolly
{"title":"Impact of primary care exercise referral schemes on the health of patients with obesity.","authors":"Helen M Parretti,&nbsp;Suzanne E Bartington,&nbsp;Tim Badcock,&nbsp;Lucy Hughes,&nbsp;Joan L Duda,&nbsp;Kate Jolly","doi":"10.2147/POR.S118648","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Primary care exercise referral schemes (ERSs) are a potentially useful setting to promote physical activity (PA). It is not established, however, whether interventions to increase PA, such as ERSs, have differing health outcomes according to the participants' body mass index (BMI). This paper summarizes evidence for the impact of primary care ERSs on the health of people with obesity and reports findings of a reanalysis of the EMPOWER study, providing the first data to report differential outcomes of ERSs by BMI category. Our literature review revealed a paucity of published data. A 2011 Health Technology Assessment review and 2015 update were identified, but normal-weight participants were neither excluded nor were results stratified by weight in the included studies. A study of the effect of exercise referral in overweight women reported a significantly greater increase in PA levels in the ERS group than the control group at 3 months. Reanalysis of the EMPOWER study data showed a significant improvement in PA at 3 months in both obese and overweight/normal BMI groups, with the effect size attenuated to 6 months. There was no significant difference from baseline to 6 months in blood pressure for either BMI category. At 6 months, there was a significant decrease in weight from baseline for the obese category. Comparison of crude mean differences between BMI groups revealed a significant mean difference in PA at 3 months favoring the overweight/normal BMI group, but not at 6 months. There were no further significant differences in unadjusted or adjusted mean differences for other outcomes at follow-up. We report some evidence of a differential impact of ERS on PA by BMI category. However, the effect of ERSs in primary care for patients with obesity remains unclear due to the small number of published studies that have reported outcomes by BMI category. Further research is needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":20399,"journal":{"name":"Pragmatic and Observational Research","volume":"8 ","pages":"189-201"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2017-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2147/POR.S118648","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pragmatic and Observational Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/POR.S118648","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Primary care exercise referral schemes (ERSs) are a potentially useful setting to promote physical activity (PA). It is not established, however, whether interventions to increase PA, such as ERSs, have differing health outcomes according to the participants' body mass index (BMI). This paper summarizes evidence for the impact of primary care ERSs on the health of people with obesity and reports findings of a reanalysis of the EMPOWER study, providing the first data to report differential outcomes of ERSs by BMI category. Our literature review revealed a paucity of published data. A 2011 Health Technology Assessment review and 2015 update were identified, but normal-weight participants were neither excluded nor were results stratified by weight in the included studies. A study of the effect of exercise referral in overweight women reported a significantly greater increase in PA levels in the ERS group than the control group at 3 months. Reanalysis of the EMPOWER study data showed a significant improvement in PA at 3 months in both obese and overweight/normal BMI groups, with the effect size attenuated to 6 months. There was no significant difference from baseline to 6 months in blood pressure for either BMI category. At 6 months, there was a significant decrease in weight from baseline for the obese category. Comparison of crude mean differences between BMI groups revealed a significant mean difference in PA at 3 months favoring the overweight/normal BMI group, but not at 6 months. There were no further significant differences in unadjusted or adjusted mean differences for other outcomes at follow-up. We report some evidence of a differential impact of ERS on PA by BMI category. However, the effect of ERSs in primary care for patients with obesity remains unclear due to the small number of published studies that have reported outcomes by BMI category. Further research is needed.

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
初级保健运动转诊方案对肥胖患者健康的影响
初级保健运动推荐计划(ERSs)是促进身体活动(PA)的潜在有用设置。然而,目前尚不清楚增加PA的干预措施(如ERSs)是否会根据参与者的体重指数(BMI)产生不同的健康结果。本文总结了初级保健ERSs对肥胖人群健康影响的证据,并报告了EMPOWER研究的再分析结果,首次提供了按BMI类别报告ERSs差异结果的数据。我们的文献综述显示,发表的数据很少。确定了2011年的卫生技术评估回顾和2015年的更新,但在纳入的研究中,正常体重的参与者既没有被排除,也没有按体重对结果进行分层。一项关于运动转诊对超重女性影响的研究报告称,在3个月时,ERS组的PA水平明显高于对照组。EMPOWER研究数据的再分析显示,在肥胖和超重/正常BMI组中,3个月时PA均有显著改善,效应值减弱至6个月。从基线到6个月,两种BMI类型的血压没有显著差异。6个月时,肥胖组的体重较基线有显著下降。BMI组间粗平均差异的比较显示,体重超重/正常BMI组在3个月时PA有显著的平均差异,但在6个月时没有显著差异。在随访中,未调整或调整的其他结果的平均差异没有进一步的显著差异。我们报告了一些证据,表明ERS对不同BMI类别的PA有不同的影响。然而,ERSs在肥胖患者的初级保健中的作用尚不清楚,因为少数已发表的研究报告了BMI类别的结果。需要进一步的研究。
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
Pragmatic and Observational Research
Pragmatic and Observational Research MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: Pragmatic and Observational Research is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access journal that publishes data from studies designed to closely reflect medical interventions in real-world clinical practice, providing insights beyond classical randomized controlled trials (RCTs). While RCTs maximize internal validity for cause-and-effect relationships, they often represent only specific patient groups. This journal aims to complement such studies by providing data that better mirrors real-world patients and the usage of medicines, thus informing guidelines and enhancing the applicability of research findings across diverse patient populations encountered in everyday clinical practice.
期刊最新文献
Improving the Transparency and Replicability of Consensus Methods: Respiratory Medicine as a Case Example. Non-Alcoholic Steatohepatitis Patient Characterization and Real-World Management Approaches in Italy. Comparing Machine Learning and Advanced Methods with Traditional Methods to Generate Weights in Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting: The INFORM Study. Involvement of Root Canal Treatment in Pro-Inflammatory Processes - A Real-World Study. UK Electronic Healthcare Records for Research: A Scientometric Analysis of Respiratory, Cardiovascular, and COVID-19 Publications.
×
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:481959085
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