{"title":"关于定期和间歇性极低卡路里饮食计划使用者特征的真实世界证据,以及与计划成功、健康和生活质量测量的关联","authors":"Patrice Jones, Michelle Blumfield, Emma Beckett, Skye Marshall, Kylie Abbott, Emily Duve, Flavia Fayet‐Moore","doi":"10.1002/osp4.712","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Background Very low‐calorie diet (VLCD) programs are readily available in Australia. However, there is a lack of real‐world evidence describing the characteristics related to positive outcomes. Aims To examine the demographic, eating, self‐efficacy and program engagement characteristics of VLCD users in Australia, and the associations between user characteristics and program success, weight loss, quality of life (QOL) and health. Method Cross‐sectional data from Australian adults; regular users (n=189: VLCD user ≥4 days/week for >4 weeks) and intermittent users (n=111, VLCD user <4 weeks and/or <4 days/week). Self‐reported data on demographics, VLCD program use, support, eating behaviour, weight‐related QOL, mental health, physical health, self‐efficacy, and physical activity. Descriptive and inferential statistics were performed in R. Results Compared to regular users, intermittent users reported lower percentage weight loss (15.1%±SD 9.8 vs. 9.9%±SD 6.8, relative to starting weight), fewer reported their VLCD program as very successful (44% vs. 35%), higher depressive symptom scores (8.7±SD 2.8 vs. 6.7±SD 5.1), and lower general self‐efficacy (23.9±SD 4.7 vs. 29.4±SD5.7), nutrition self‐efficacy (11.9± SD 2.0 vs. 14.5± SD 3.1) and weight‐related QOL scores (60.9±SD 22.2 vs. 65.0±SD 11.8; p<0.001 for all). In regular users, older age and longer program duration were associated with greater total weight loss, support, and program success (p<0.001 for all). In intermittent users, program success was greater when dietitian support was used (OR 6.50) and for those with higher BMIs (OR 1.08, p<0.001 for all). In both groups, more frequent support was associated with better weight‐related QOL (p<0.001). Conclusion This study provides real‐world evidence that regular VLCD users had greater success and weight loss over intermittent program users. Findings may be used to tailor and improve the delivery of VLCD programs in Australia and other countries with retail access to VLCDs. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.","PeriodicalId":19448,"journal":{"name":"Obesity Science & Practice","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Real world evidence on the characteristics of regular and intermittent users of a very‐low calorie diet program and associations with measures of program success, health, and quality of life\",\"authors\":\"Patrice Jones, Michelle Blumfield, Emma Beckett, Skye Marshall, Kylie Abbott, Emily Duve, Flavia Fayet‐Moore\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/osp4.712\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Background Very low‐calorie diet (VLCD) programs are readily available in Australia. However, there is a lack of real‐world evidence describing the characteristics related to positive outcomes. Aims To examine the demographic, eating, self‐efficacy and program engagement characteristics of VLCD users in Australia, and the associations between user characteristics and program success, weight loss, quality of life (QOL) and health. Method Cross‐sectional data from Australian adults; regular users (n=189: VLCD user ≥4 days/week for >4 weeks) and intermittent users (n=111, VLCD user <4 weeks and/or <4 days/week). Self‐reported data on demographics, VLCD program use, support, eating behaviour, weight‐related QOL, mental health, physical health, self‐efficacy, and physical activity. Descriptive and inferential statistics were performed in R. Results Compared to regular users, intermittent users reported lower percentage weight loss (15.1%±SD 9.8 vs. 9.9%±SD 6.8, relative to starting weight), fewer reported their VLCD program as very successful (44% vs. 35%), higher depressive symptom scores (8.7±SD 2.8 vs. 6.7±SD 5.1), and lower general self‐efficacy (23.9±SD 4.7 vs. 29.4±SD5.7), nutrition self‐efficacy (11.9± SD 2.0 vs. 14.5± SD 3.1) and weight‐related QOL scores (60.9±SD 22.2 vs. 65.0±SD 11.8; p<0.001 for all). In regular users, older age and longer program duration were associated with greater total weight loss, support, and program success (p<0.001 for all). In intermittent users, program success was greater when dietitian support was used (OR 6.50) and for those with higher BMIs (OR 1.08, p<0.001 for all). In both groups, more frequent support was associated with better weight‐related QOL (p<0.001). Conclusion This study provides real‐world evidence that regular VLCD users had greater success and weight loss over intermittent program users. Findings may be used to tailor and improve the delivery of VLCD programs in Australia and other countries with retail access to VLCDs. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19448,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Obesity Science & Practice\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Obesity Science & Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/osp4.712\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Obesity Science & Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/osp4.712","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景极低热量饮食(VLCD)计划在澳大利亚很容易获得。然而,缺乏真实世界的证据来描述与积极结果相关的特征。目的研究澳大利亚VLCD用户的人口统计学、饮食、自我效能和项目参与特征,以及用户特征与项目成功、体重减轻、生活质量和健康之间的关系。方法:澳大利亚成年人的横断面数据;常规用户(n=189: VLCD用户≥4天/周,持续>4周)和间歇性用户(n=111, VLCD用户<4周和/或<4天/周)人口统计、VLCD程序使用、支持、饮食行为、体重相关生活质量、心理健康、身体健康、自我效能和身体活动的自我报告数据。结果与常规使用者相比,间歇性使用者报告的体重减轻百分比较低(相对于初始体重,15.1%±SD 9.8 vs 9.9%±SD 6.8), VLCD计划非常成功的报告较少(44% vs 35%),抑郁症状评分较高(8.7±SD 2.8 vs 6.7±SD 5.1),一般自我效能较低(23.9±SD 4.7 vs 29.4±SD5.7)。营养自我效能(11.9±SD 2.0 vs. 14.5±SD 3.1)和体重相关生活质量评分(60.9±SD 22.2 vs. 65.0±SD 11.8);P<均为0.001)。在常规用户中,年龄越大和项目持续时间越长,总体减重、支持和项目成功程度越高(p<0.001)。在间歇性使用者中,当使用营养师支持时(OR 6.50)和那些bmi较高的人(OR 1.08, p<0.001),计划的成功更大。在两组中,更频繁的支持与更好的体重相关生活质量相关(p<0.001)。结论:这项研究提供了真实世界的证据,证明定期使用VLCD的人比间歇性使用VLCD的人减肥更成功。研究结果可用于定制和改进澳大利亚和其他零售访问VLCD的国家的VLCD计划的交付。这篇文章受版权保护。版权所有。
Real world evidence on the characteristics of regular and intermittent users of a very‐low calorie diet program and associations with measures of program success, health, and quality of life
Abstract Background Very low‐calorie diet (VLCD) programs are readily available in Australia. However, there is a lack of real‐world evidence describing the characteristics related to positive outcomes. Aims To examine the demographic, eating, self‐efficacy and program engagement characteristics of VLCD users in Australia, and the associations between user characteristics and program success, weight loss, quality of life (QOL) and health. Method Cross‐sectional data from Australian adults; regular users (n=189: VLCD user ≥4 days/week for >4 weeks) and intermittent users (n=111, VLCD user <4 weeks and/or <4 days/week). Self‐reported data on demographics, VLCD program use, support, eating behaviour, weight‐related QOL, mental health, physical health, self‐efficacy, and physical activity. Descriptive and inferential statistics were performed in R. Results Compared to regular users, intermittent users reported lower percentage weight loss (15.1%±SD 9.8 vs. 9.9%±SD 6.8, relative to starting weight), fewer reported their VLCD program as very successful (44% vs. 35%), higher depressive symptom scores (8.7±SD 2.8 vs. 6.7±SD 5.1), and lower general self‐efficacy (23.9±SD 4.7 vs. 29.4±SD5.7), nutrition self‐efficacy (11.9± SD 2.0 vs. 14.5± SD 3.1) and weight‐related QOL scores (60.9±SD 22.2 vs. 65.0±SD 11.8; p<0.001 for all). In regular users, older age and longer program duration were associated with greater total weight loss, support, and program success (p<0.001 for all). In intermittent users, program success was greater when dietitian support was used (OR 6.50) and for those with higher BMIs (OR 1.08, p<0.001 for all). In both groups, more frequent support was associated with better weight‐related QOL (p<0.001). Conclusion This study provides real‐world evidence that regular VLCD users had greater success and weight loss over intermittent program users. Findings may be used to tailor and improve the delivery of VLCD programs in Australia and other countries with retail access to VLCDs. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.