Cargando…

Weight loss intervention adherence and factors promoting adherence: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Adhering to weight loss interventions is difficult for many people. The majority of those who are overweight or obese and attempt to lose weight are simply not successful. The objectives of this study were 1) to quantify overall adherence rates for various weight loss interventions and 2...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lemstra, Mark, Bird, Yelena, Nwankwo, Chijioke, Rogers, Marla, Moraros, John
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4990387/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27574404
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S103649
_version_ 1782448693796929536
author Lemstra, Mark
Bird, Yelena
Nwankwo, Chijioke
Rogers, Marla
Moraros, John
author_facet Lemstra, Mark
Bird, Yelena
Nwankwo, Chijioke
Rogers, Marla
Moraros, John
author_sort Lemstra, Mark
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Adhering to weight loss interventions is difficult for many people. The majority of those who are overweight or obese and attempt to lose weight are simply not successful. The objectives of this study were 1) to quantify overall adherence rates for various weight loss interventions and 2) to provide pooled estimates for factors associated with improved adherence to weight loss interventions. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of all studies published between January 2004 and August 2015 that reviewed weight loss intervention adherence. RESULTS: After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria and checking the methodological quality, 27 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The overall adherence rate was 60.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 53.6–67.2). The following three main variables were found to impact adherence: 1) supervised attendance programs had higher adherence rates than those with no supervision (rate ratio [RR] 1.65; 95% CI 1.54–1.77); 2) interventions that offered social support had higher adherence than those without social support (RR 1.29; 95% CI 1.24–1.34); and 3) dietary intervention alone had higher adherence than exercise programs alone (RR 1.27; 95% CI 1.19–1.35). CONCLUSION: A substantial proportion of people do not adhere to weight loss interventions. Programs supervising attendance, offering social support, and focusing on dietary modification have better adherence than interventions not supervising attendance, not offering social support, and focusing exclusively on exercise.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4990387
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49903872016-08-29 Weight loss intervention adherence and factors promoting adherence: a meta-analysis Lemstra, Mark Bird, Yelena Nwankwo, Chijioke Rogers, Marla Moraros, John Patient Prefer Adherence Original Research BACKGROUND: Adhering to weight loss interventions is difficult for many people. The majority of those who are overweight or obese and attempt to lose weight are simply not successful. The objectives of this study were 1) to quantify overall adherence rates for various weight loss interventions and 2) to provide pooled estimates for factors associated with improved adherence to weight loss interventions. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of all studies published between January 2004 and August 2015 that reviewed weight loss intervention adherence. RESULTS: After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria and checking the methodological quality, 27 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The overall adherence rate was 60.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 53.6–67.2). The following three main variables were found to impact adherence: 1) supervised attendance programs had higher adherence rates than those with no supervision (rate ratio [RR] 1.65; 95% CI 1.54–1.77); 2) interventions that offered social support had higher adherence than those without social support (RR 1.29; 95% CI 1.24–1.34); and 3) dietary intervention alone had higher adherence than exercise programs alone (RR 1.27; 95% CI 1.19–1.35). CONCLUSION: A substantial proportion of people do not adhere to weight loss interventions. Programs supervising attendance, offering social support, and focusing on dietary modification have better adherence than interventions not supervising attendance, not offering social support, and focusing exclusively on exercise. Dove Medical Press 2016-08-12 /pmc/articles/PMC4990387/ /pubmed/27574404 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S103649 Text en © 2016 Lemstra et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.
spellingShingle Original Research
Lemstra, Mark
Bird, Yelena
Nwankwo, Chijioke
Rogers, Marla
Moraros, John
Weight loss intervention adherence and factors promoting adherence: a meta-analysis
title Weight loss intervention adherence and factors promoting adherence: a meta-analysis
title_full Weight loss intervention adherence and factors promoting adherence: a meta-analysis
title_fullStr Weight loss intervention adherence and factors promoting adherence: a meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Weight loss intervention adherence and factors promoting adherence: a meta-analysis
title_short Weight loss intervention adherence and factors promoting adherence: a meta-analysis
title_sort weight loss intervention adherence and factors promoting adherence: a meta-analysis
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4990387/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27574404
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S103649
work_keys_str_mv AT lemstramark weightlossinterventionadherenceandfactorspromotingadherenceametaanalysis
AT birdyelena weightlossinterventionadherenceandfactorspromotingadherenceametaanalysis
AT nwankwochijioke weightlossinterventionadherenceandfactorspromotingadherenceametaanalysis
AT rogersmarla weightlossinterventionadherenceandfactorspromotingadherenceametaanalysis
AT morarosjohn weightlossinterventionadherenceandfactorspromotingadherenceametaanalysis