4.5 Article

Treating obesity with a novel hand-held device, computer software program, and Internet technology in primary care: The SMART motivational trial

期刊

PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING
卷 79, 期 2, 页码 185-191

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2009.07.034

关键词

Weight loss; Obesity; E-mail; Motivational interviewing; Self-efficacy; Attitude; Indirect calorimetry; Self-monitoring

资金

  1. Microlife Medical Home Solutions, Inc.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the short-term motivational effect of a technology-based weight reduction program for obese adults. Methods: One hundred and eleven obese (37.0 +/- 5.8 kg/m(2)) middle aged (45.5 +/- 10.8 years) adults (62% female) were randomly assigned to a usual care or experimental (SMART: self-monitoring and resting metabolic rate technology) group. The usual care group received a standard nutritional program in accordance to national guidelines. All participants received a comprehensive weight management program consisting of motivational interviewing (MI) sessions and automated e-mail behavioral newsletters. Bodyweight, arterial blood pressure, and psychobehavioral constructs were assessed over 12 weeks. Results: Completer analysis (n = 80) indicated a significant improvement in bodyweight (-3.9%), systolic arterial pressure (-4 mmHg), and all motivational constructs following the 12-week study (p <= .05). However, there were no significant differences between groups at any time period. Conclusion: Based on these data, a 12-week comprehensive weight reduction program consisting of MI and automated e-mail behavioral newsletters with or without SMART is efficacious in treating obese adults. Practice implications: Although both treatment programs were equally effective, clinicians should consider a treatment program that meets the need of the patient. This study was registered at ClinicalTrails.gov NCT00750022. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据