Biomedical subjects

Counterweight Project Team

Publications and source records attributed to Counterweight Project Team.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2005

Obesity impacts on general practice appointments.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify the impact of obesity on the number of visits to both primary and secondary care teams. RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES: The adult populations of 80 general practices throughout the United Kingdom were classified according to their BMI. We undertook a cross-sectional survey of computer-generated and handwritten records of 6150 obese people (BMI > or = 30 kg/m(2)) and 1150 normal weight (BMI = 18.5 to 24.9 kg/m(2)) control subjects over an 18-month retrospective period. RESULTS: Obese patients made significantly more visits to the general practitioner (GP), practice nurse (PN), and hospital outpatient units than normal weight patients (all p < 0.001), and they were admitted to the hospital more often (p = 0.034). For both GP and PN visits, the relationship remained after adjusting for age, sex, social deprivation category, country, and number of comorbidities. Among obese patients, there was an increasing relationship between frequent GP visits (at least four appointments) and greater BMI, which remained significant after adjustment had been made for age, sex, deprivation, country, and number of comorbidities. DISCUSSION: The human resource burden to general practice is significantly higher in the obese population than in the normal weight population, even when adjusted for confounding factors. The increase in prevalence of obesity will continue to put pressure on GP and PN time unless appropriate action is taken.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

Empowering primary care to tackle the obesity epidemic: the Counterweight Programme.

OBJECTIVE: To improve the management of obese adults (18-75 y) in primary care. DESIGN: Cohort study. SETTINGS: UK primary care. SUBJECTS: Obese patients (body mass index > or =30 kg/m(2)) or BMI> or =28 kg/m(2) with obesity-related comorbidities in 80 general practices. INTERVENTION: The model consists of four phases: (1) audit and project development, (2) practice training and support, (3) nurse-led patient intervention, and (4) evaluation. The intervention programme used evidence-based pathways, which included strategies to empower clinicians and patients. Weight Management Advisers who are specialist obesity dietitians facilitated programme implementation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of practices trained and recruiting patients, and weight change at 12 months. RESULTS: By March 2004, 58 of the 62 (93.5%) intervention practices had been trained, 47 (75.8%) practices were active in implementing the model and 1549 patients had been recruited. At 12 months, 33% of patients achieved a clinically meaningful weight loss of 5% or more. A total of 49% of patients were classed as 'completers' in that they attended the requisite number of appointments in 3, 6 and 12 months. 'Completers' achieved more successful weight loss with 40% achieving a weight loss of 5% or more at 12 months. CONCLUSION: The Counterweight programme provides a promising model to improve the management of obesity in primary care.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2005

The impact of obesity on drug prescribing in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare costs attributable to obesity have previously involved estimations based on costs of diseases commonly considered as having obesity as an underlying factor. AIM: To quantify the impact of obesity on total primary care drug prescribing. DESIGN OF STUDY: Review of computer generated and handwritten prescriptions to determine total prescribing volume for all drug classes. SETTING: Twenty-three general practice surgeries in the UK. METHOD: Stratified random selection of 1150 patients who were obese (body mass index [BMI]>30 kg/m(2)) and 1150 age and sex-matched controls of normal weight (BMI 18.5-<25 kg/m(2)). Retrospective review of medical records over an 18-month period. RESULTS: A higher percentage of patients who were obese, compared with those of normal weight, were prescribed at least one drug in the following disease categories: cardiovascular (36% versus 20%), central nervous system (46% versus 35%), endocrine (26% versus 18%), and musculoskeletal and joint disease (30% versus 22%). All of these categories had a P-value of <0.001. Other categories, such as gastrointestinal (24% versus 18%), infections (42% versus 35%), skin (24% versus 19%) had a P-value of <0.01, while respiratory diseases (18% versus 21%) had a P-value of <0.05. Total prescribing volume was significantly higher for the group with obesity and was increased in the region of two- to fourfold in a wide range of prescribing categories: ulcer healing drugs, lipid regulators, beta-adrenoreceptor drugs, drugs affecting the rennin angiotensin system, calcium channel blockers, antibacterial drugs, sulphonylureas, biguanides, non-steroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDs) (P<0.001) and fibrates, angiotensin II antagonists, and thyroid drugs (P<0.05). The main impact on prescribing volumes is from numbers of patients treated, although in some areas there is an effect from greater dosage or longer treatment in those who are obese including calcium channel blockers, antihistamines, hypnotics, drugs used in the treatment of nausea and vertigo, biguanides, and NSAIDs (P<0.05) reflected in significantly increased defined daily dose prescribing. CONCLUSIONS: This large study of contemporary practice indicates that obesity more than doubled prescribing in most drug categories.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2004

A new evidence-based model for weight management in primary care: the Counterweight Programme.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Obesity has become a global epidemic, and a major preventable cause of morbidity and mortality. Management strategies and treatment protocols are however poorly developed and evaluated. The aim of the Counterweight Programme is to develop an evidence-based model for the management of obesity in primary care. METHODS: The Counterweight Programme is based on the theoretical model of Evidence-Based Quality Assessment aimed at improving the management of obese adults (18-75 years) in primary care. The model consists of four phases: (1) practice audit and needs assessment, (2) practice support and training, (3) practice nurse-led patient intervention, and (4) evaluation. Patient intervention consisted of screening and treatment pathways incorporating evidence-based approaches, including patient-centred goal setting, prescribed eating plans, a group programme, physical activity and behavioural approaches, anti-obesity medication and weight maintenance strategies. Weight Management Advisers who are specialist obesity dietitians facilitated programme implementation. Eighty practices were recruited of which 18 practices were randomized to act as controls and receive deferred intervention 2 years after the initial audit. RESULTS: By February 2004, 58 of the 62 (93.5%) intervention practices had been trained to run the intervention programme, 47 (75.8%) practices were active in implementing the model and 1256 patients had been recruited (74% female, 26% male, mean age 50.6 years, SD 14). At baseline, 75% of patients had at one or more co-morbidity, and the mean body mass index (BMI) was 36.9 kg/m(2) (SD 5.4). Of the 1256 patients recruited, 91% received one of the core lifestyle interventions in the first 12 months. For all patients followed up at 12 months, 34% achieved a clinical meaningful weight loss of 5% or more. A total of 51% of patients were classed as compliant in that they attended the required level of appointments in 3, 6, and 12 months. For fully compliant patients, weight loss improved with 43% achieving a weight loss of 5% or more at 12 months. CONCLUSION: The Counterweight Programme is an evidence-based weight management model which is feasible to implement in primary care.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2004

Current approaches to obesity management in UK Primary Care: the Counterweight Programme.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Primary care is expected to develop strategies to manage obese patients as part of coronary heart disease and diabetes national service frameworks. Little is known about current management practices for obesity in this setting. The aim of this study is to examine current approaches to obesity management in UK primary care and to identify potential gaps in care. METHOD: A total of 141 general practitioners (GPs) and 66 practice nurses (PNs) from 40 primary care practices participated in structured interviews to examine clinician self-reported approaches to obesity management. Medical records were also reviewed for 100 randomly selected obese patients from each practice [body mass index (BMI) >/=30 kg m(-2), n = 4000] to review rates of diet counselling, dietetic or obesity centre referrals, and use of anti-obesity medication. Computerized medical records for the total practice population (n = 206 341, 18-75 years) were searched to examine the proportion of patients with a weight/BMI ever recorded. RESULTS: Eighty-three per cent of GPs and 97% of PNs reported that they would raise weight as an issue with obese patients (P < 0.01). Few GPs (15%) reported spending up to 10 min in a consultation discussing weight-related issues, compared with PNs (76%; P < 0.001). Over 18 months, practice-based diet counselling (20%), dietetic (4%) and obesity centre (1%) referrals, and any anti-obesity medication (2%) were recorded. BMI was recorded for 64.2% of patients and apparent prevalence of obesity was less than expected. CONCLUSION: Obesity is under-recognized in primary care even in these 40 practices with an interest in weight management. Weight management appears to be based on brief opportunistic intervention undertaken mainly by PNs. While clinicians report the use of external sources of support, few patients are referred, with practice-based counselling being the most common intervention.

Adolescent↗