Dataset Information

Extended follow-up of a short total diet replacement programme: results of the Doctor Referral of Overweight People to Low Energy total diet replacement Treatment (DROPLET) randomised controlled trial at 3 years.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To test the long-term effectiveness of a total diet replacement programme (TDR) for routine treatment of obesity in a primary care setting.

Methods

This study was a pragmatic, two-arm, parallel-group, open-label, individually randomised controlled trial in adults with obesity. The outcomes were change in weight and biomarkers of diabetes and cardiovascular disease risk from baseline to 3 years, analysed as intention-to-treat with mixed effects models.

Interventions

The intervention was TDR for 8 weeks, followed by food-reintroduction over 4 weeks. Behavioural support was provided weekly for 8 weeks, bi-weekly for the next 4 weeks, then monthly for 3 months after which no further support was provided. The usual care (UC) group received dietary advice and behavioural support from a practice nurse for up to 3 months.

Results

Outcome measures were collected from 179 (66%) participants. Compared with baseline, at 3 years the TDR group lost -6.2 kg (SD 9.1) and usual care -2.7 kg (SD 7.7); adjusted mean difference -3.3 kg (95% CI: -5.2, -1.5), p < 0.0001. Regain from programme end (6 months) to 3 years was greater in TDR group +8.9 kg (SD 9.4) than UC + 1.2, (SD 9.1); adjusted mean difference +6.9 kg (95% CI 4.2, 9.5) P < 0.001. At 3 years TDR led to greater reductions than UC in diastolic blood pressure (mean difference -3.3 mmHg (95% CI:-6.2; -0.4) P = 0.024), and systolic blood pressure (mean differences -3.7 mmHg (95% CI: -7.4; 0.1) P = 0.057). There was no evidence of differences between groups in the change from baseline to 3 years HbA_1c (-1.9 mmol/mol (95% CI: -0.7; 4.5; P = 0.15), LDL cholesterol concentrations (0.2 mmol/L (95% CI -0.3, 0.7) P = 0.39), cardiovascular risk score (QRISK2) (-0.37 (95% CI -0.96; 0.22); P = 0.22).

Conclusions

Treatment of people with obesity with a TDR programme compared with support from a practice nurse leads to greater weight loss which persists to at least 3 years, but there was only evidence of sustained improvements in BP and not in other aspects of cardiometabolic risk.

SUBMITTER: Astbury NM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8528708 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo test the effectiveness and safety of a total diet replacement (TDR) programme for routine treatment of obesity in a primary care setting.DesignPragmatic, two arm, parallel group, open label, individually randomised controlled trial.Setting10 primary care practices in Oxfordshire, UK.Participants278 adults who were obese and seeking support to lose weight: 138 were assigned to the TDR programme and 140 to usual care. 73% of participants were re-measured at 12 months.InterventionsThe TDR programme comprised weekly behavioural support for 12 weeks and monthly support for three months, with formula food products providing 810 kcal/day (3389 kJ/day) as the sole food during the first eight weeks followed by reintroduction of food. Usual care comprised behavioural support for weight loss from a practice nurse and a diet programme with modest energy restriction.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was weight change at 12 months analysed as intention to treat with mixed effects models. Secondary outcomes included biomarkers of cardiovascular and metabolic risk. Adverse events were recorded.ResultsParticipants in the TDR group lost more weight (-10.7 kg) than those in the usual care group (-3.1 kg): adjusted mean difference -7.2 kg (95% confidence interval -9.4 to -4.9 kg). 45% of participants in the TDR group and 15% in the usual care group experienced weight losses of 10% or more. The TDR group showed greater improvements in biomarkers of cardiovascular and metabolic risk than the usual care group. 11% of participants in the TDR group and 12% in the usual care group experienced adverse events of moderate or greater severity.ConclusionsCompared with regular weight loss support from a practice nurse, a programme of weekly behavioural support and total diet replacement providing 810 kcal/day seems to be tolerable, and leads to substantially greater weight loss and greater improvements in the risk of cardiometabolic disease.Trial registrationInternational Standard Randomised Controlled Trials No ISRCTN75092026.

Project description:IntroductionThe global prevalence of obesity has risen significantly in recent decades. There is a pressing need to identify effective interventions to treat established obesity that can be delivered at scale. The aim of the Doctor Referral of Overweight People to a Low-Energy Treatment (DROPLET) study is to determine the clinical effectiveness, feasibility and acceptability of referral to a low-energy total diet replacement programme compared with usual weight management interventions in primary care.Methods and analysisThe DROPLET trial is a randomised controlled trial comparing a low-energy total diet replacement programme with usual weight management interventions delivered in primary care. Eligible patients will be recruited through primary care registers and randomised to receive a behavioural support programme delivered by their practice nurse or a referral to a commercial provider offering an initial 810 kcal/d low-energy total diet replacement programme for 8 weeks, followed by gradual food reintroduction, along with weekly behavioural support for 24 weeks. The primary outcome is weight change at 12 months. The secondary outcomes are weight change at 3 and 6 months, the proportion of participants achieving 5% and 10% weight loss at 12 months, and change in fat mass, haemoglobin A1c, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and systolic and diastolic blood pressure at 12 months. Data will be analysed on the basis of intention to treat. Qualitative interviews on a subsample of patients and healthcare providers will assess their experiences of the weight loss programmes and identify factors affecting acceptability and adherence.Ethics and disseminationThis study has been reviewed and approved by the National Health ServiceHealth Research Authority (HRA)Research Ethics Committee (Ref: SC/15/0337). The trial findings will be disseminated to academic and health professionals through presentations at meetings and peer-reviewed journals and to the public through the media. If the intervention is effective, the results will be communicated to policymakers and commissioners of weight management services.Trial registration numberISRCTN75092026.

Project description:Background An effective newborn hearing screening programme has low referral rate and low loss to follow-up (LTFU) rate after referral from initial screening. This systematic review identified studies evaluating the effect of protocol and programme factors on these two outcomes, including the screening method used and the infant group. Methods Five databases were searched (latest: April 2021). Included studies reported original data from newborn hearing screening and described the target outcomes against a protocol or programme level factor. Studies were excluded if results were only available for one risk condition, for each ear, or for < 100 infants, or if methodological bias was observed. Included studies were evaluated for quality across three domains: sample, screening and outcome, using modified criteria from the Ottawa-Newcastle and QUADAS-2 scales. Findings from the included studies were synthesised in tables, figures and text. Results Fifty-eight studies reported on referral rate, 8 on LTFU rate, and 35 on both. Only 15 studies defined LTFU. Substantial diversity in referral and LTFU rate was observed across studies. Twelve of fourteen studies that evaluated screening method showed lower referral rates with aABR compared to TEOAE for well babies (WB). Rescreening before hospital discharge and screening after 3 days of age reduced referral rates. Studies investigating LTFU reported lower rates for programmes that had audiologist involvement, did not require fees for step 2, were embedded in a larger regional or national programme, and scheduled follow-up in a location accessible to the families. In programmes with low overall LTFU, higher LTFU was observed for infants from the NICU compared to WB. Conclusion Although poor reporting and exclusion of non-English articles may limit the generalisability from this review, key influential factors for referral and LTFU rates were identified. Including aABR in WB screening can effectively reduce referral rates, but it is not the only solution. The reported referral and LTFU rates vary largely across studies, implying the contribution of several parameters identified in this review and the context in which the programme is performed. Extra attention should be paid to infants with higher risk for hearing impairment to ensure their return to follow-up. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12887-022-03218-0.

Project description:Introduction:The aim of this work is to compare in a retrospective study, the radiological results of three series of different total knee replacements performed using Orthopilot computer-based alignment system (Group A, 31 patients), a totally intramedullary alignment system (Group B, 34 patients) and a totally extramedullary alignment system (Group C, 32 patients). Materials and methods:At a medium follow-up of 15 years, all patients underwent call interview for clinical update. Of the 115 patients initially enrolled in the study, only 97 were available for radiological assessment. Both standing long-leg antero-posterior radiographs and lateral radiographs of the knee had been taken for every patient at 1 year-follow-up and at the last follow-up. Results:At the last follow-up, the mean hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA) was 179.1° (range: 176°-184°) for group A, 178.6° (range: 173°-186°) for group B and 177.8° (range: 172°-186°) for group C with no statistically significant difference among the 3 groups. The mean frontal femoral component angle (FFC) was 90.5° (range: 87°-94°) for group A, 91.05° (range: 85°-95°) for group B and 91.19° (range: 85°-96°) for group C and there was no statistically significant difference among the three groups. The mean frontal tibial component angle (FTC) was 89.9° (range: 83°-97°) for group A, 90.6° (range: 87°-95°) for group B and 90.8° (range: 86°-95°) for group C and there was no statistically significant difference among the three groups. The mean tibial component inclination in the sagittal plane was 1° (range: 3°-0°) for group A, 3.6° (range: 7°-0°) for group B and 3.1° (range: 6°-0°) for group C. Discussion and conclusion:Our results demonstrated statistically significant differences between computer-assisted and extramedullary group, in favour of navigated group in terms of implant position and mechanical alignment. Computer-assisted group showed superior but not statistically significant differences compared to intramedullary alignment system in terms of implant position and mechanical alignment. We advocate the use of computer-assisted system routinely in total knee replacement. As an alternative, we suggest the use of intramedullary system.

Project description:BackgroundThe purpose of this study is to present clinical outcome data from a 2-year post-market study of a viscoelastic one-piece cervical total disc replacement (TDR) in Europe.MethodsThirty-nine patients were implanted at five surgical sites in an European post-market clinical study. Clinical outcomes included improvement of neck disability index (NDI) and visual analog scale scores for neck and arm pain from baseline to 2-year follow-up, neurological examinations, patients view on the success of surgery, complications, and subsequent surgical interventions.ResultsThirty patients had the Freedom® Cervical Disc (FCD) implanted at a single level, and nine patients were implanted at two adjacent levels. The population had a similar distribution of male [20] and female [19] subjects, with a mean age of 45 years. All self-administered outcome measures showed significant clinically important improvements from baseline to the 2-year follow-up. Mean preoperative NDI score improved from 48% to 20%, 13%, 8%, 6% and 4% at 6 weeks, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively. Average preoperative visual analog scale (VAS) scores of the neck, right and left arm pain intensity and frequency showed significant improvement. All neurological outcome measurements showed immediate improvement from preoperative values and continued improvement throughout 2 years follow-up. From pre-op to 24 months, neurological deficits declined in the population from 21% to 6% for reflex function, 62% to 17% for sensory function, and 38% to 3% for motor function. No patients experienced a deterioration in any measured outcomes compared with the preoperative situation. Patient satisfaction increased over 2 years post-op, with 83% of patients responding that they would "definitely" choose to have the same treatment for their neck/arm condition and another 11% responding that they would "probably" choose to have the same treatment.ConclusionsThe FCD performs as expected in patients with single-level and two-level degenerative disc disease.