A. Ahern, P. Aveyard, E. Boyland, J. Halford, S. Jebb
{"title":"一项实用试验中体重管理干预的不平等:一项初级保健的观察性研究","authors":"A. Ahern, P. Aveyard, E. Boyland, J. Halford, S. Jebb","doi":"10.3399/bjgp16X684337","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Primary care referral to a commercial open-group behavioural weight-loss programme is a cost-effective intervention, but only 10% of patients receiving this intervention are male. Aim To explore whether observed biases in participation in these interventions reflect biases in the uptake of the invitation to participate. Design and setting Comparison of invited population and recruited participants in a multicentre randomised controlled trial of primary care referral to a commercial open-group behavioural weight-loss programme in England (WRAP [Weight loss Referrals for Adults in Primary care]). Method Between October 2012 and February 2014, participants were recruited through 23 primary care practices in England; 17 practices provided data on the characteristics of invited participants. Results Females were twice as likely as males to enrol in the trial (odds ratio [OR] 2.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.75 to 2.32). However, the proportion of males was threefold higher than seen in routine primary care referrals or similar trials that invited patients opportunistically. People from less deprived areas were more likely to enrol than those in more deprived areas (OR 1.77, 95% CI = 1.55 to 2.03). Older patients (≥40 years) were more likely to enrol than younger patients (OR 1.60, 95% CI = 1.34 to 1.91). Conclusion Males, younger people, and those from more deprived areas were less likely to take up the invitation to participate in this trial. The gender bias was smaller than observed in routine practice, suggesting that a substantial proportion of the inequity observed previously is a consequence of bias with regard to the offer of intervention. This study suggests that a simple way to overcome much of the gender bias is to write to patients who are overweight and offer referral. Uptake of the invitation to participate was lower in groups of lower socioeconomic status suggesting the need to preferentially offer referrals to this group to reduce health inequalities and for research to explore barriers to uptake.","PeriodicalId":22333,"journal":{"name":"The British Journal of General Practice","volume":"104 1","pages":"e258 - e263"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"51","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Inequalities in the uptake of weight management interventions in a pragmatic trial: an observational study in primary care\",\"authors\":\"A. Ahern, P. Aveyard, E. Boyland, J. Halford, S. Jebb\",\"doi\":\"10.3399/bjgp16X684337\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background Primary care referral to a commercial open-group behavioural weight-loss programme is a cost-effective intervention, but only 10% of patients receiving this intervention are male. Aim To explore whether observed biases in participation in these interventions reflect biases in the uptake of the invitation to participate. Design and setting Comparison of invited population and recruited participants in a multicentre randomised controlled trial of primary care referral to a commercial open-group behavioural weight-loss programme in England (WRAP [Weight loss Referrals for Adults in Primary care]). Method Between October 2012 and February 2014, participants were recruited through 23 primary care practices in England; 17 practices provided data on the characteristics of invited participants. Results Females were twice as likely as males to enrol in the trial (odds ratio [OR] 2.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.75 to 2.32). However, the proportion of males was threefold higher than seen in routine primary care referrals or similar trials that invited patients opportunistically. People from less deprived areas were more likely to enrol than those in more deprived areas (OR 1.77, 95% CI = 1.55 to 2.03). Older patients (≥40 years) were more likely to enrol than younger patients (OR 1.60, 95% CI = 1.34 to 1.91). Conclusion Males, younger people, and those from more deprived areas were less likely to take up the invitation to participate in this trial. The gender bias was smaller than observed in routine practice, suggesting that a substantial proportion of the inequity observed previously is a consequence of bias with regard to the offer of intervention. This study suggests that a simple way to overcome much of the gender bias is to write to patients who are overweight and offer referral. Uptake of the invitation to participate was lower in groups of lower socioeconomic status suggesting the need to preferentially offer referrals to this group to reduce health inequalities and for research to explore barriers to uptake.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22333,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The British Journal of General Practice\",\"volume\":\"104 1\",\"pages\":\"e258 - e263\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-02-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"51\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The British Journal of General Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp16X684337\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The British Journal of General Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp16X684337","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 51
摘要
初级保健转介到商业开放组行为减肥计划是一种具有成本效益的干预措施,但接受这种干预的患者中只有10%是男性。目的探讨观察到的参与这些干预的偏差是否反映了参与邀请的接受偏差。设计和设置:在英国进行的一项多中心随机对照试验中,初级保健转介到商业开放组行为减肥计划(WRAP[初级保健成人减肥转介])的邀请人群和招募参与者的比较。方法2012年10月至2014年2月,参与者通过英国23个初级保健诊所招募;17种做法提供了关于受邀参与者特征的数据。结果女性参加试验的可能性是男性的两倍(优势比[OR] 2.01, 95%可信区间[CI] = 1.75 ~ 2.32)。然而,男性的比例比常规的初级保健转诊或类似的机会性邀请患者的试验高出三倍。较贫困地区的人比较贫困地区的人更有可能入学(OR 1.77, 95% CI = 1.55至2.03)。老年患者(≥40岁)比年轻患者更有可能入组(OR 1.60, 95% CI = 1.34 ~ 1.91)。结论:男性、年轻人和来自贫困地区的人不太可能接受邀请参加这项试验。性别偏见比在常规实践中观察到的要小,这表明之前观察到的不平等的很大一部分是关于提供干预的偏见的结果。这项研究表明,克服大部分性别偏见的一个简单方法是写信给超重的患者并提供转诊。社会经济地位较低的群体对参加邀请的接受程度较低,这表明需要优先向这一群体提供转诊,以减少健康不平等现象,并研究探索接受邀请的障碍。
Inequalities in the uptake of weight management interventions in a pragmatic trial: an observational study in primary care
Background Primary care referral to a commercial open-group behavioural weight-loss programme is a cost-effective intervention, but only 10% of patients receiving this intervention are male. Aim To explore whether observed biases in participation in these interventions reflect biases in the uptake of the invitation to participate. Design and setting Comparison of invited population and recruited participants in a multicentre randomised controlled trial of primary care referral to a commercial open-group behavioural weight-loss programme in England (WRAP [Weight loss Referrals for Adults in Primary care]). Method Between October 2012 and February 2014, participants were recruited through 23 primary care practices in England; 17 practices provided data on the characteristics of invited participants. Results Females were twice as likely as males to enrol in the trial (odds ratio [OR] 2.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.75 to 2.32). However, the proportion of males was threefold higher than seen in routine primary care referrals or similar trials that invited patients opportunistically. People from less deprived areas were more likely to enrol than those in more deprived areas (OR 1.77, 95% CI = 1.55 to 2.03). Older patients (≥40 years) were more likely to enrol than younger patients (OR 1.60, 95% CI = 1.34 to 1.91). Conclusion Males, younger people, and those from more deprived areas were less likely to take up the invitation to participate in this trial. The gender bias was smaller than observed in routine practice, suggesting that a substantial proportion of the inequity observed previously is a consequence of bias with regard to the offer of intervention. This study suggests that a simple way to overcome much of the gender bias is to write to patients who are overweight and offer referral. Uptake of the invitation to participate was lower in groups of lower socioeconomic status suggesting the need to preferentially offer referrals to this group to reduce health inequalities and for research to explore barriers to uptake.