4.7 Article

Gaps to bridge: Misalignment between perception, reality and actions in obesity

期刊

DIABETES OBESITY & METABOLISM
卷 21, 期 8, 页码 1914-1924

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/dom.13752

关键词

ACTION-IO; attitudes; barriers; international; obesity; perceptions

资金

  1. Novo Nordisk

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims Despite increased recognition as a chronic disease, obesity remains greatly underdiagnosed and undertreated. We aimed to identify international perceptions, attitudes, behaviours and barriers to effective obesity care in people with obesity (PwO) and healthcare professionals (HCPs). Materials and methods An online survey was conducted in 11 countries. Participants were adults with obesity and HCPs who were primarily concerned with direct patient care. Results A total of 14 502 PwO and 2785 HCPs completed the survey. Most PwO (68%) and HCPs (88%) agreed that obesity is a disease. However, 81% of PwO assumed complete responsibility for their own weight loss and only 44% of HCPs agreed that genetics were a barrier. There was a median of three (mean, six) years between the time PwO began struggling with excess weight or obesity and when they first discussed their weight with an HCP. Many PwO were concerned about the impact of excess weight on health (46%) and were motivated to lose weight (48%). Most PwO (68%) would like their HCP to initiate a conversation about weight and only 3% were offended by such a conversation. Among HCPs, belief that patients have little interest in or motivation for weight management may constitute a barrier for weight management conversations. When discussed, HCPs typically recommended lifestyle changes; however, more referrals and follow-up appointments are required. Conclusions Our international dataset reveals a need to increase understanding of obesity and improve education concerning its physiological basis and clinical management. Realization that PwO are motivated to lose weight offers an opportunity for HCPs to initiate earlier weight management conversations.

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

4.7
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