Network Obesity Management Program
Susan Bowerman, Mindy Bellman, Pamela Saltsman, Denise Garvey, Kevin Pimstone, Samuel Skootsky, He-Jing Wang, Robert Elashoff, and David Heber
Abstract
BOWERMAN, SUSAN, MINDY BELLMAN, PAMELA SALTSMAN, DENISE GARVEY, KEVIN PIMSTONE, SAMUEL SKOOTSKY, HE-JING WANG, ROBERT ELASHOFF, AND DAVID HEBER. Implementation of a primary care physician network obesity management program. Obes Res. 2001;9:321S–325S.
Most primary care physicians do not treat obesity, citing lack of time, resources, insurance reimbursement, and knowledge of effective interventions as significant barriers. To address this need, a 10-minute intervention delivered by the primary care physician was coupled with individual dietary counseling sessions delivered by a registered dieti-tian via telephone with an automated calling system (House-Calls, Mobile, AL). Patients were seen for follow-up by their physician at weeks 4, 12, 24, 36 and 52. A total of 252 patients (202 women and 50 men) were referred by 18 primary care physicians to the program. The comorbid conditions reported for all patients at baseline included low back pain, 29% (n ⫽ 72); hypertension, 45% (n ⫽ 113); hypercholesterolemia, 41% (n⫽104); type 2 diabetes, 10% (n ⫽ 26); and sleep apnea, 5% (n⫽ 12). When offered a choice of meal plans based on foods or meal replacements, two-thirds of patients (n⫽166) chose to use meal replace-ments (Ultra Slim-Fast; Slim-Fast Foods Co., West Palm Beach, FL) at least once daily. Baseline weights of subjects averaged 200⫾46 lb for women (n⫽202) and 237⫾45 lb for men (n⫽ 50). Patients completing 6 months in the program lost an average of 19.0⫾ 4.0 lb for women (n⫽ 94) and 15.5⫾8.2 lb for men (n⫽26). Physicians reported a high degree of satisfaction with the program, suggesting that a brief, effective physician-directed program with nu-tritionist support by telephone can be implemented in a busy primary care office.
Key words: primary care, meal replacement, physician-directed diet, weight loss, practical guidelines
Introduction
With the incidence of overweight and obesity among adults in the United States at an all-time high and continuing to rise, the number of patients seeking advice for weight management in the primary care setting is likely to parallel this trend. Most adults in primary care settings are over-weight or obese, and two-thirds of patients with over-weight problems have obesity-related conditions (1). Many primary care physicians are reluctant to treat overweight and obese patients, citing lack of time, patient noncompliance, inadequate teaching materials, lack of counseling training, inadequate reimbursement, and low physician confidence as barriers to treatment (2– 8). Among those who do address dietary issues with their patients, the time spent discussing weight manage-ment has been reported to be 5 minutes or less (2).
However, primary care physicians reach most segments of the population, and their expertise is highly regarded by their patients (9), placing them in a unique position to provide nutrition information. Traditionally, physicians have referred patients out of the office for dietary counsel-ing, although there are those who express interest in coun-seling their patients for weight management. To address some of the more important issues of time constraints, lack of physician education, lack of patient-teaching materials, and perceived lack of self-efficacy, we developed a new model for a primary care office-based weight management program that positions the physician as the agent of change and that provides for telephonic dietitian follow-up consultation.
In a 1-day chart review within the University of Califor-nia, Los Angeles Healthcare Network, comprising 20 med-ical practices throughout Southern California, 33% of pa-tients visiting the clinics had a body mass index (BMI) between 25 and 29.9 kg/m2, 23% had a BMI between 30 and 39.9 kg/m2, and 4% had a BMI of 40 kg/m2or higher. These findings are similar to other reports (10) and are
University of California, Los Angeles, Center for Human Nutrition, Los Angeles, California. Address correspondence to Dr. Susan Bowerman, University of California, Los Angeles Center for Human Nutrition, Warren Hall Room 12-217, 900 Veteran Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1742.
E-mail: [email protected] Copyright © 2001 NAASO
higher than the incidences reported in population-based surveys (11). Because the network had no specific program for weight management within the primary care setting, we approached physicians within the network to identify those with a particular interest in weight management.
A workshop was held to discuss current assessment and treatment of overweight and obesity and to determine from interested physicians how to structure the most effective program within the primary care setting. Program materials were then developed with the goal of providing primary care practitioners tools for a brief, direct intervention with their overweight and obese patients.
Research Methods and Procedures
Implementation guidelines developed to describe the principles of the 1-year program include the following: the role of the physician as an agent of change, determination of BMI and body composition in patient assessment, the use of meal replacements and portion-controlled meals for calorie control, the identification of high-calorie trigger foods in the diet and the management of their intake, reinforcement of the role of exercise in weight management, and guidelines for the use of pharmacotherapy, where indicated. The pro-gram is designed to be 12 months long and is outlined with recommended appointment intervals with the physician and interventions at each visit (Table 1). The plan calls for telephone follow-up consultation with a registered dietitian at weekly intervals for the first 12 weeks and monthly for the remaining 9 months.A patient–physician Guide to Healthy Weight Loss Worksheet was developed for physicians and patients to complete. Information gathered from the patient portion of the worksheet allows the physician to assess the patient’s readiness to change, and the portion of the worksheet com-pleted by the physician promotes his or her role as a partner in treatment. Handouts for patient use were also developed. Meal plans for 1200- and 1500-calorie diets, incorporating the use of meal replacements and portion-controlled meals, were designed for simplicity of explanation and implemen-tation. Supporting handouts, which provide caloric values for fruits, vegetables, and starchy vegetables in the meal plan; information on the use of meal replacements and the avoidance of trigger foods; and the value of regular exercise complete the patient education materials packet. A patient enrollment form was also developed, which was designed to collect patient information regarding weight, height, BMI, body fat percentage and target weight, comorbid conditions, calorie level prescribed, and prescription medications given, if any. On the same form, the patient signs and indicates the days and times that they prefer to be called by the dietitian. Once all of the materials were developed, interested phy-sicians were visited personally for an introduction to the program. A notebook containing the implementation guide-lines and handout masters were provided to each physician,
and guidelines for patient enrollment were reviewed. Each physician office was provided a bioelectrical impedance analyzer (BioDynamics, Inc., Seattle, WA) and physicians and staff members were trained in use of the equipment and interpretation of data collected from the analysis. Once physicians offered the program to the patient, enrollment forms were faxed to a registered dietitian located offsite at our center, and enrollment was then complete. An auto-mated telephone calling system (HouseCalls, Mobile, AL) was installed to allow the telephone counselor to monitor the calling schedule and to facilitate patient calling through
Table 1. Obesity treatment plan
Time line Type of intervention
Week 1 Initial doctor appointment ● Baseline labs for
comorbidities (diabetes mellitus, hyperlipidemia)* ● Weight, height, body mass
index
● Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA)
● Patients return for blood pressure and weight check at week 2—if on
pharmacotherapy)
Weeks 1 to 12 Diet counselor calls weekly during weeks 1 to 12
Week 4 Follow-up doctor’s appointment Week 12 Repeat laboratory assessment of
comorbidities
Physician phone follow-up for laboratory interpretation as needed.
Week 24 Follow-up with doctor, repeat BIA Assess weight loss progress If patient not making progress,
consider referral to other resources
Weeks 12 to 52 Monthly diet counseling by telephone as needed
Week 36 (9 month) Follow-up doctor’s appointment Week 52 (12 month) Follow-up doctor’s appointment
Repeat BIA
Repeat laboratory assessment
* Recommended laboratory assessment: comprehensive panel, lipid panel.
automated dialing. The system also has the capability to record messages in the counselor’s own voice, which can then be sent by automatic dialing to all enrolled patients. Although all patients are speaking directly with the dietitian, the recorded messages have been used as a retention strategy, such as sending patients encouraging messages over the winter holiday season, and can be used for sending appointment reminders, birthday greetings, or research news.
Following the guidelines, the registered dietitian tele-phoned each patient enrolled in the program once a week for the first 12 weeks and monthly for the remaining 9 months according to the days and times specified by the patient on the enrollment form. The telephone counselor provides sup-port, guidance, and encouragement to the patients and an-swers dietary questions. The counselor also gathers infor-mation about the patient’s weight loss, diet, medication and exercise compliance, and use of meal replacements.
Physicians receive a monthly faxed report from the dietitian summarizing the results of all telephone contacts with the enrolled patients. A separate form is prepared for each patient so that the information can be easily placed in the patient’s chart.
Results
To date, a total of 252 patients (202 women and 50 men) have been referred to the program by 18 primary care physicians in the University of California, Los Angeles Healthcare Network. Baseline weights of subjects averaged 200⫾46.5 lb (90.7⫾21.1 kg) for women (n⫽202) and 237⫾45.4 lb (107.5⫾20.6 kg) for men (n⫽50). BMI at baseline was 34⫾6 kg/m2and 33⫾7 kg/m2for men and women, respectively. Men had a mean body fat percentage, as measured by bioelectrical impedance, of 31.9⫾4.9% at baseline, and women had baseline body fat percentage av-eraging 37. 9⫾ 5.3% (Table 2).
The comorbid conditions reported for all subjects at baseline included low back pain, 29% (n ⫽ 72); hyper-tension, 45% (n⫽113); hypercholesterolemia, 41% (n⫽ 104); type 2 diabetes, 10% (n⫽26); and sleep apnea, 5% (n⫽ 12; Table 3).
Women completing 3 months in the program (n⫽123) lost an average of 9.2 lb (4.2 kg) and men (n⫽ 33) lost
an average of 6.0 lb (2.7 kg). For those who completed 6 months, weight loss continued, with women (n ⫽ 94) losing an average of 19 lb (8.6 kg), and men (n ⫽ 26) losing an average of 15.5 lb (7.0 kg) from baseline weight (Table 4).
Physicians participating in the program were surveyed after 1 year and reported a high degree of satisfaction with the program’s use within a busy practice setting. In partic-ular, all physicians surveyed agreed that the bioelectrical impedance analysis instrument had been a valuable tool in patient assessment. Ninety percent of those responding to the survey believed that the program had benefited their practices and that they were better able to treat their patients because of the training and support they received through the program.
Discussion
Obese patients are generally well-informed about diet and weight issues and do perceive the health risks asso-ciated with overweight (12). Furthermore, these individ-uals are in a good position to critically assess the weight loss advice provided by their doctors. Studies have indi-cated that fewer than one-half of overweight and obese patients are advised to lose weight by their doctors (2,13– 15), and only a small percentage believe that the advice that they receive is positive or useful (16). At the same time, the perception among patients is that physicians
Table 2. Baseline weights, body mass index, and
body fat percentage
Men (n ⴝ50)
Women (n ⴝ202) Weight (kg) 90.7⫾21.1 107.5⫾20.6 Body mass index (kg/m2) 34⫾6 33⫾7 Body fat (%) 31.9⫾4.9 37.9⫾5.3
Table 3. Comorbid conditions at baseline (N⫽252)
Number affected Percentage affected Hypertension 113 45 Hypercholesterolemia 104 41 Musculoskeletal pain 72 29 Type 2 diabetes 26 10 Sleep apnea 12 5
Table 4. Weight loss from baseline of participants
completing 3 and 6 months
Men Women Baseline weight (kg) 107.5⫾20.4 90.7 ⫾20.8 (n⫽ 50) (n⫽ 202) Weight lost at 3 months (kg) ⫺2.7 ⫺4.2 (n⫽ 33) (n⫽ 123) Weight lost at 6 months (kg) ⫺7.0 ⫺8.6 (n⫽ 26) (n⫽ 94)
have a high degree of expertise and, therefore, do have the ability to influence the lifestyles and eating habits of their patients. Because of their high perceived expertise and their ability to reach nearly all segments of the population, primary care physicians are in a unique po-sition to provide nutrition information to patients, com-pared with dietitians (9). Patients with productive inter-actions with clinicians have improved nutritional care and are more likely to report receiving help with eating problems (17). Advice from a physician to make lifestyle changes may prime patients to become more aware of and attentive to health information. However, although there are many printed educational materials available, estab-lishing a link between written materials and physician advice is an important first step in establishing an office-based system for weight management and disease pre-vention. Patients who receive physician advice for life-style change within a coordinated system of support and information delivery perceive that advice as individual-ized and are more likely to attempt behavior change (18). Physician training in the effective sharing of informa-tion and continuous involvement of the client in the interaction should be stressed over the more traditional prescriptive approach to medical management of weight. In a busy office setting, physicians need brief, direct encounters with their patients regarding weight, and brief yet direct interactions have been shown to be effective (19 –21). However, physician training in counseling tech-niques alone seems to be insufficient compared with training in nutritional counseling coupled with a struc-tured environment for nutrition management (22). Ap-propriate training in counseling skills can increase physician confidence and self-efficacy (23). The provi-sion of telephone dietitian counseling coupled with patient education materials and physician education pro-vides an integrated program that facilitates effective phy-sician-delivered nutrition counseling. Follow-up by tele-phone has been shown to be effective in a variety of situations (24 –27) and can be a convenient and cost-effective method for ongoing patient care. Our model suggests that a brief, effective physician-directed pro-gram, with telephonic nutritionist support, can be im-plemented in the setting of a busy primary care office and that physicians can experience a high degree of satisfaction by following a training program in effec-tive counseling and with the provision of appropriate program support.
Acknowledgments
This project is supported by an unrestricted grant from Slim-Fast Foods Company. Theresa Clemens was respon-sible for data management on this project.
References
1. Logue E, Sutton K, Jarjoura D, Smucker W. Obesity man-agement in primary care: assessment of readiness to change among 284 family practice patients. J Am Board Fam Pract. 2000;13:164 –71.
2. Kushner RF. Barriers to providing nutrition counseling by physicians: a survey of primary care practitioners. Prev Med. 1995;24:546 –52.
3. Hiddink GJ, Hautvast JG, Van Woerkum CM, Fieren CJ, Van’t Hof MA. Nutrition guidance by primary-care physi-cians: perceived barriers and low involvement. Eur J Clin Nutr. 1995;49:842–51.
4. Pratt CA, Nosiri UI, Pratt CB. Michigan physicians’ per-ceptions of their role in managing obesity. Percept Mot Skills. 1997;84:848 –50.
5. Truswell AS. Family physicians and patients: is effective nutrition interaction possible? Am J Clin Nutr. 2000;71:6 –12. 6. Helman A. Nutrition and general practice: an Australian
perspective. Am J Clin Nutr. 1997;65:1939S– 42.
7. Harris JE, Hamaday V, Mochan E. Osteopathic family physicians’ attitudes, knowledge and self-reported practices regarding obesity. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 1999;99:358 – 65. 8. Kenner MM, Taylor ML, Dunn PC, Gruchow HW, Kolasa
K. Primary care providers need a variety of nutrition and wellness patient education materials. J Am Diet Assoc. 1999; 99:4662– 6.
9. Hiddink GJ, Hautvast JG, Van Woerkum CM, Fieren CJ, Van’t Hof MA. Consumers’ expectations about nutrition guidance: the importance of primary care physicians. Am J Clin Nutr. 1997;65:1974S–9.
10. Noel M, Hickner J, Ettenhofer T, Gauthier B. The high prevalence of obesity in Michigan primary care practices: an UPRNet study. Upper Peninsula Research Network. J Fam Pract. 1998;47:39 – 43.
11. Must AV, Spadano J, Coakley EH, Field AE, Colditz G, Dietz WH. The disease burden associated with overweight and obesity. J Am Med Assoc. 1999;282:1523–9.
12. Little P. GP documentation of obesity: what does it achieve? Br J Gen Pract. 1998;48:890 – 4.
13. Galuska DA, Will JC, Serdula MK, Ford ES. Are health care professionals advising obese patients to lose weight? J Am Med Assoc. 1999;282:1576 – 8.
14. Kristeller JL, Hoerr RA. Physician attitudes toward manag-ing obesity: differences among six specialty groups. Prev Med. 1997;26:542–9.
15. Heath C, Grant W, Marcheni P, Kamps C. Do family physicians treat obese patients? Fam Med. 1993;25:401–2. 16. Evans E. Why should obesity be managed? The obese
indi-vidual’s perspective. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 1999;23: S3–5.
17. Wasson JH, Ahles T, Bazos D, Bracken A, Patterson JA, Johnson DJ. Streamlining nutritional care for the physician’s office. Eur J Clin Nutr. 1999;53:S97–100.
18. Kreuter MW, Chheda SG, Bull FC. How does physician advice influence patient behavior? Arch Fam Med. 2000;9: 426 –33.
19. Wadden TA, Berkowitz RI, Vogt RA, Steen SN, Stunkard AJ, Foster GD. Lifestyle modification in the pharmacologic
treatment of obesity: a pilot investigation of a potential pri-mary care approach. Obes Res. 1997;5:218 –26.
20. Beresford SA, Curry SJ, Kristal AR, Laxovich D, Feng Z, Wagner EH. A dietary intervention in primary care practice: the Eating Patterns Study. Am J Public Health. 1997;87: 610 – 6.
21. Ockene IS, Hebert JR, Ockene JK, et al. Effect of physi-cian-delivered nutrition counseling training and an office-support program on saturated fat intake, weight, and serum lipid measurements in a hyperlipidemic population: Worcester Area Trial for Counseling in Hyperlipidemia (WATCH). Arch Intern Med. 1999;159:725–31.
22. Ockene IS, Hebert JR, Ockene JK, Merriam PA, Hurley TG, Saperia GM. Effect of training and a structured office practice on physician-delivered nutrition counseling: the Worcester-Area Trial for Counseling in Hyperlipidemia (WATCH). Am J Prev Med. 1996;12:252– 8.
23. Evans AT, Rogers LQ, Peden JG, et al. Teaching dietary counseling skills to residents: patient and physician out-comes. The CADRE Study Group. Am J Prev Med. 1996; 12:259 – 65.
24. Schofferman J, Diamond N, Oill PA, Becker L. Use of the telephone for short-term follow up. Med Care. 1997;15: 430 – 4.
25. Ramelson HZ, Friedman RH, Ockene JK. An automated telephone-based smoking cessation education and counseling system. Patient Educ Couns. 1999;32:131– 44.
26. Friedman RH. Automated telephone conversations to assess health behavior and deliver behavioral interventions. J Med Syst. 1998;22:95–102.
27. Piette JD, Weinberger M, McPhee SJ, Mah CA, Kraemer MD, Crapo LM. Do automated calls with nurse follow-up improve self-care and glycemic control among vulnerable patients with diabetes? Am J Med. 2000;108:20 –7.
