Article Sidebar
Published:
Mar 18, 2020Keywords:
Article Details
The author(s) retain copyright on work published by AOSIS unless specified otherwise.
Licensing and publication rights
Author(s) of work published by AOSIS are required to grant AOSIS the unlimited rights to publish the definitive work in any format, language and medium, for any lawful purpose. AOSIS requires journal authors to publish their work in open access under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence.
The authors retain the non-exclusive right to do anything they wish with the published article(s), provided attribution is given to the applicable journal with details of the original publication, as set out in the official citation of the article published in the journal. The retained right specifically includes the right to post the article on the authors’ or their institution’s websites or in institutional repositories.
Previously published work may have been published under a different licence. We advise the community that if they would like to reuse the work to consult the applicable licence at article level.
Note: If you need to comply with your funding body policy, you can apply for the CC BY license after your manuscript is accepted for publication.
Main Article Content
Group-based intervention in a primary healthcare setting was more effective for weight loss than usual care
Abstract
Background: Literature and practice recommendations for lifestyle interventions to treat the increasing number of obese patients with non- communicable diseases (NCDs) or risk factors for NCDs attending resource-constrained public healthcare facilities in South Africa are scarce.
Aim: To compare the impact of a facility-based therapeutic group (FBTG) intervention with usual care on weight in obese participants, with NCDs or risk factors for NCDs.
Setting: Public healthcare facility providing primary healthcare services in Cape Town, South Africa.
Methods: A quasi-experimental study design was used where participants chose to receive weight loss treatment with either the FBTG or usual care interventions. Both interventions involved a one-on-one medical and dietetic consultation, while FBTG participants had six additional group sessions. Follow-up assessments took place 6 months after baseline. Sociodemographic variables, blood pressure, smoking status, weight, height, waist circumference, dietary intake, physical activity and stage of change were measured.
Results: Of the 193 obese adults enrolled, 96 selected the FBTG and 97 selected usual care. There were no significant differences at baseline between the two groups. Weight loss over 6 months was greater (p < 0.001) in FBTG (median [IQR] of -2.9 [-5.1; -0.3] kg) than usual care (-0.9 [-0.9; 0.6] kg) participants. At 6 months, more FBTG completers reached the weekly target of 150 min (p = 0.009), while both groups showed improvements in dietary intake. More FBTG (74%) than usual care (49%) participants were in the action stage of change by 6 months (p = 0.010).
Conclusions: The group-based intervention was more effective than usual care in weight reduction as well as improvements in physical activity and stage of change.
Keywords: Group-based intervention; Weight loss; Non-communicable diseases; Primary health care; South Africa.