Cargando…

Comparison of Weight Loss Data Collected by Research Technicians Versus Electronic Medical Records: The PROPEL Trial

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Pragmatic trials are increasingly used to study the implementation of weight loss interventions in real-world settings. This study compared researcher-measured body weights versus electronic medical record (EMR)-derived body weights from a pragmatic trial conducted in an under...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Katzmarzyk, Peter T., Mire, Emily F., Martin, Corby K., Newton, Robert L., Apolzan, John W., Price-Haywood, Eboni G., Denstel, Kara D., Horswell, Ronald, Chu, San T., Johnson, William D.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9329211/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35523955
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41366-022-01129-9
_version_ 1784757882047168512
author Katzmarzyk, Peter T.
Mire, Emily F.
Martin, Corby K.
Newton, Robert L.
Apolzan, John W.
Price-Haywood, Eboni G.
Denstel, Kara D.
Horswell, Ronald
Chu, San T.
Johnson, William D.
author_facet Katzmarzyk, Peter T.
Mire, Emily F.
Martin, Corby K.
Newton, Robert L.
Apolzan, John W.
Price-Haywood, Eboni G.
Denstel, Kara D.
Horswell, Ronald
Chu, San T.
Johnson, William D.
author_sort Katzmarzyk, Peter T.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Pragmatic trials are increasingly used to study the implementation of weight loss interventions in real-world settings. This study compared researcher-measured body weights versus electronic medical record (EMR)-derived body weights from a pragmatic trial conducted in an underserved patient population. SUBJECTS/METHODS: The PROPEL trial randomly allocated 18 clinics to usual care (UC) or to an intensive lifestyle intervention (ILI) designed to promote weight loss. Weight was measured by trained technicians at baseline and at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. A total of 11 clinics (6 UC/5 ILI) with 577 enrolled patients also provided EMR data (n = 561), which included available body weights over the period of the trial. RESULTS: The total number of assessments were 2 638 and 2 048 for the researcher-measured and EMR-derived body weight values, respectively. The correlation between researcher-measured and EMR-derived body weights was 0.988 (n = 1 939; p<0.0001). The mean difference between the EMR and researcher weights (EMR-researcher) was 0.63 (2.65 SD) kg, and a Bland-Altman graph showed good agreement between the two data collection methods; the upper and lower boundaries of the 95% limits of agreement are −4.65 kg and +5.91 kg, and 71 (3.7%) of the values were outside the limits of agreement. However, at 6 months, percent weight loss in the ILI compared to the UC group was 7.3% using researcher-measured data versus 5.5% using EMR-derived data. At 24 months, the weight loss maintenance was 4.6% using the technician-measured data versus 3.5% using EMR-derived data. CONCLUSION: At the group level, body weight data derived from researcher assessments and an EMR showed good agreement; however, the weight loss difference between ILI and UC was blunted when using EMR data. This suggests that weight loss studies that rely on EMR data may require larger sample sizes to detect significant effects. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT02561221
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9329211
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93292112022-11-06 Comparison of Weight Loss Data Collected by Research Technicians Versus Electronic Medical Records: The PROPEL Trial Katzmarzyk, Peter T. Mire, Emily F. Martin, Corby K. Newton, Robert L. Apolzan, John W. Price-Haywood, Eboni G. Denstel, Kara D. Horswell, Ronald Chu, San T. Johnson, William D. Int J Obes (Lond) Article BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Pragmatic trials are increasingly used to study the implementation of weight loss interventions in real-world settings. This study compared researcher-measured body weights versus electronic medical record (EMR)-derived body weights from a pragmatic trial conducted in an underserved patient population. SUBJECTS/METHODS: The PROPEL trial randomly allocated 18 clinics to usual care (UC) or to an intensive lifestyle intervention (ILI) designed to promote weight loss. Weight was measured by trained technicians at baseline and at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. A total of 11 clinics (6 UC/5 ILI) with 577 enrolled patients also provided EMR data (n = 561), which included available body weights over the period of the trial. RESULTS: The total number of assessments were 2 638 and 2 048 for the researcher-measured and EMR-derived body weight values, respectively. The correlation between researcher-measured and EMR-derived body weights was 0.988 (n = 1 939; p<0.0001). The mean difference between the EMR and researcher weights (EMR-researcher) was 0.63 (2.65 SD) kg, and a Bland-Altman graph showed good agreement between the two data collection methods; the upper and lower boundaries of the 95% limits of agreement are −4.65 kg and +5.91 kg, and 71 (3.7%) of the values were outside the limits of agreement. However, at 6 months, percent weight loss in the ILI compared to the UC group was 7.3% using researcher-measured data versus 5.5% using EMR-derived data. At 24 months, the weight loss maintenance was 4.6% using the technician-measured data versus 3.5% using EMR-derived data. CONCLUSION: At the group level, body weight data derived from researcher assessments and an EMR showed good agreement; however, the weight loss difference between ILI and UC was blunted when using EMR data. This suggests that weight loss studies that rely on EMR data may require larger sample sizes to detect significant effects. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT02561221 2022-08 2022-05-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9329211/ /pubmed/35523955 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41366-022-01129-9 Text en Users may view, print, copy, and download text and data-mine the content in such documents, for the purposes of academic research, subject always to the full Conditions of use: https://www.springernature.com/gp/open-research/policies/accepted-manuscript-terms
spellingShingle Article
Katzmarzyk, Peter T.
Mire, Emily F.
Martin, Corby K.
Newton, Robert L.
Apolzan, John W.
Price-Haywood, Eboni G.
Denstel, Kara D.
Horswell, Ronald
Chu, San T.
Johnson, William D.
Comparison of Weight Loss Data Collected by Research Technicians Versus Electronic Medical Records: The PROPEL Trial
title Comparison of Weight Loss Data Collected by Research Technicians Versus Electronic Medical Records: The PROPEL Trial
title_full Comparison of Weight Loss Data Collected by Research Technicians Versus Electronic Medical Records: The PROPEL Trial
title_fullStr Comparison of Weight Loss Data Collected by Research Technicians Versus Electronic Medical Records: The PROPEL Trial
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Weight Loss Data Collected by Research Technicians Versus Electronic Medical Records: The PROPEL Trial
title_short Comparison of Weight Loss Data Collected by Research Technicians Versus Electronic Medical Records: The PROPEL Trial
title_sort comparison of weight loss data collected by research technicians versus electronic medical records: the propel trial
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9329211/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35523955
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41366-022-01129-9
work_keys_str_mv AT katzmarzykpetert comparisonofweightlossdatacollectedbyresearchtechniciansversuselectronicmedicalrecordsthepropeltrial
AT mireemilyf comparisonofweightlossdatacollectedbyresearchtechniciansversuselectronicmedicalrecordsthepropeltrial
AT martincorbyk comparisonofweightlossdatacollectedbyresearchtechniciansversuselectronicmedicalrecordsthepropeltrial
AT newtonrobertl comparisonofweightlossdatacollectedbyresearchtechniciansversuselectronicmedicalrecordsthepropeltrial
AT apolzanjohnw comparisonofweightlossdatacollectedbyresearchtechniciansversuselectronicmedicalrecordsthepropeltrial
AT pricehaywoodebonig comparisonofweightlossdatacollectedbyresearchtechniciansversuselectronicmedicalrecordsthepropeltrial
AT denstelkarad comparisonofweightlossdatacollectedbyresearchtechniciansversuselectronicmedicalrecordsthepropeltrial
AT horswellronald comparisonofweightlossdatacollectedbyresearchtechniciansversuselectronicmedicalrecordsthepropeltrial
AT chusant comparisonofweightlossdatacollectedbyresearchtechniciansversuselectronicmedicalrecordsthepropeltrial
AT johnsonwilliamd comparisonofweightlossdatacollectedbyresearchtechniciansversuselectronicmedicalrecordsthepropeltrial
AT comparisonofweightlossdatacollectedbyresearchtechniciansversuselectronicmedicalrecordsthepropeltrial