4.4 Article

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures 2 Years After Standard and Distal Gastric Bypass-a Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

Journal

OBESITY SURGERY
Volume 28, Issue 3, Pages 606-614

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11695-017-2891-3

Keywords

Quality of life; Bariatric surgery; Lifestyle modification; Outcome; Health-related quality of life

Categories

Funding

  1. South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The preferred surgical procedure for treating morbid obesity is debated. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are relevant for evaluation of the optimal bariatric procedure. A total of 113 patients with BMI from 50 to 60 were randomly assigned to standard (n = 57) or distal (n = 56) Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Validated PROMS questionnaires were completed at baseline and 2 years after surgery. Data were analyzed using mixed models for repeated measures and the results are expressed as estimated means and mean changes. Obesity-related quality of life improved significantly after both procedures, without significant between-group differences (- 0.4 (95% CI = - 8.4, 7.2) points, p = 0.88, ES = 0.06). Both groups had significant reductions in the number of weight-related symptoms and symptom distress score, with a mean group difference (95% CI) of 1.4 (- 0.3, 3.3) symptoms and 5.0 (2.9. 12.8) symptom distress score points. There were no between-group differences for uncontrolled eating (22.0 (17.2-26.7) vs. 28.9 (23.3-34.5) points), cognitive restraint (57.4 (52.0-62.7) vs. 62.1 (57.9-66.2) points), and emotional eating (26.8 (20.5-33.1) vs. 32.6 (25.5-39.7) points). The prevalence of anxiety was 33% after standard and 25% after distal RYGB (p = 0.53), and for depression 12 and 9%, respectively (p = 0.76). There were no statistically significant differences between standard and distal RYGB 2 years post surgery regarding weight loss, obesity-related quality of life, weight-related symptoms, anxiety, depression, or eating behavior.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available