Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND: The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends screening for and treating obesity. However, there are many barriers to successfully treating obesity in primary care (PC). Technology-assisted weight loss interventions offer novel ways of improving treatment, but trials are overwhelmingly conducted outside of PC and may not translate well into this setting. We conducted a systematic review of technology-assisted weight loss interventions specifically tested in PC settings. METHODS: We searched the literature from January 2000 to March 2014. INCLUSION CRITERIA: (1) Randomized controlled trial; (2) trials that utilized the Internet, personal computer, and/or mobile device; and (3) occurred in an ambulatory PC setting. We applied the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care (EPOC) and Delphi criteria to assess bias and the Pragmatic-Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary (PRECIS) criteria to assess pragmatism (whether trials occurred in the real world versus under ideal circumstances). Given heterogeneity, results were not pooled quantitatively. RESULTS: Sixteen trials met inclusion criteria. Twelve (75 %) interventions achieved weight loss (range: 0.08 kg - 5.4 kg) compared to controls, while 5-45 % of patients lost at least 5 % of baseline weight. Trial duration and attrition ranged from 3-36 months and 6-80 %, respectively. Ten (63 %) studies reported results after at least 1 year of follow-up. Interventions used various forms of personnel, technology modalities, and behavior change elements; trials most frequently utilized medical doctors (MDs) (44 %), web-based applications (63 %), and self-monitoring (81 %), respectively. Interventions that included clinician-guiding software or feedback from personnel appeared to promote more weight loss than fully automated interventions. Only two (13 %) studies used publically available technologies. Many studies had fair pragmatism scores (mean: 2.8/4), despite occurring in primary care. DISCUSSION: Compared to usual care, technology-assisted interventions in the PC setting help patients achieve weight loss, offering evidence-based options to PC providers. However, best practices remain undetermined. Despite occurring in PC, studies often fall short in utilizing pragmatic methodology and rarely provide publically available technology. Longitudinal, pragmatic, interdisciplinary, and open-source interventions are needed.

Objective: To describe Brief Action Planning (BAP), a structured, stepped-care self-management support technique for chronic illness care and disease prevention. Methods: A review of the theory and research supporting BAP and the questions and skills that comprise the technique with provision of a clinical example. Results: BAP facilitates goal setting and action planning to build self-efficacy for behavior change. It is grounded in the principles and practice of Motivational Interviewing and evidence-based constructs from the behavior change literature. Comprised of a series of 3 questions and 5 skills, BAP can be implemented by medical teams to help meet the self-management support objectives of the Patient-Centered Medical Home. Conclusion: BAP is a useful self-management support technique for busy medical practices to promote health behavior change and build patient self-efficacy for improved long-term clinical outcomes in chronic illness care and disease prevention

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Obesity has been declared a 21st century pandemic by WHO. Yet surveys reveal physicians-in-training are uncomfortable managing obesity. One major barrier is the lack of residency education on obesity management. This study incorporates an obesity-specific didactic curriculum into an internal medicine (IM) residency programme and assesses its impact on residents' knowledge, attitudes, practice behaviours, and clinical outcomes in patients with obesity. METHODS: The intervention consisted of four, 1 h, obesity-specific lectures in the University of Florida Resident Noon Conference. Lectures were taught by multidisciplinary experts and offered to 75 IM residents every 2 weeks from 5 November 2010 to 17 December 2010. Impact on IM residents' knowledge and attitudes was assessed by a pre- and post-intervention Obesity Awareness Questionnaire (OAQ). IM residents' clinical performance was assessed by chart reviews of 238 patients with body mass index >25 kg/m(2) in residents' clinics 4 months pre- and 6 months post-intervention for three clinical outcomes and seven practice behaviours on obesity management. Pre- and post-intervention outcomes were compared via paired t tests (quantitative data) or McNemar's test (binary data). RESULTS: Mean lecture attendance was 25/75 residents (33%) per lecture. Survey response was 67/75 residents (89%) pre-OAQ and 63/75 residents (84%) post-OAQ. While most attitudes remained unchanged, IM residents gained significant confidence in exercise counselling, safety of bariatric surgery, and patients' weight loss potential; they were more likely to address obesity in the plan and referrals to bariatric surgery. Clinical outcomes and IM residents' knowledge demonstrated no improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Our brief lecture-based curriculum has the potential to improve IM residents' attitudes and practice behaviours towards obesity. The lack of improvement in clinical outcomes and resident knowledge prompts the need for multimodal, longitudinal curricula with experiential application of obesity medicine.