Evaluation of the Heart of Birmingham teaching Primary Care Trust (HoBtPCT): My Choice Weight Management Programme:report commissioned by Heart of Birmingham teaching Primary Care Trust

This report details an evaluation of the My Choice Weight Management Programme undertaken by a research team from the School of Pharmacy at Aston University. The My Choice Weight Management Programme is delivered through community pharmacies and general practitioners (GPs) contracted to provide services by the Heart of Birmingham teaching Primary Care Trust. It is designed to support individuals who are ‘ready to change’ by enabling the individual to work with a trained healthcare worker (for example, a healthcare assistant, practice nurse or pharmacy assistant) to develop a care plan designed to enable the individual to lose 5-10% of their current weight. The Programme aims to reduce adult obesity levels; improve access to overweight and obesity management services in primary care; improve diet and nutrition; promote healthy weight and increased levels of physical activity in overweight or obese patients; and support patients to make lifestyle changes to enable them to lose weight. The Programme is available for obese patients over 18 years old who have a Body Mass Index (BMI) greater than 30 kg/m2 (greater than 25 kg/m2 in Asian patients) or greater than 28 kg/m2 (greater than 23.5 kg/m2 in Asian patients) in patients with co-morbidities (diabetes, high blood pressure, cardiovascular disease). Each participant attends weekly consultations over a twelve session period (the final iteration of these weekly sessions is referred to as ‘session twelve’ in this report). They are then offered up to three follow up appointments for up to six months at two monthly intervals (the final of these follow ups, taking place at approximately nine months post recruitment, is referred to as ‘session fifteen’ in this report). A review of the literature highlights the dearth of published research on the effectiveness of primary care- or community-based weight management interventions. This report may help to address this knowledge deficit. A total of 451 individuals were recruited on to the My Choice Weight Management Programme. More participants were recruited at GP surgeries (n=268) than at community pharmacies (n=183). In total, 204 participants (GP n=102; pharmacy n=102) attended session twelve and 82 participants (GP n=22; pharmacy 60) attended session fifteen. The unique demographic characteristics of My Choice Weight Management Programme participants – participants were recruited from areas with high levels of socioeconomic deprivation and over four-fifths of participants were from Black and Minority Ethnic groups; populations which are traditionally underserved by healthcare interventions – make the achievements of the Programme particularly notable. The mean weight loss at session 12 was 3.8 kg (equivalent to a reduction of 4.0% of initial weight) among GP surgery participants and 2.4 kg (2.8%) among pharmacy participants. At session 15 mean weight loss was 2.3 kg (2.2%) among GP surgery participants and 3.4 kg (4.0%) among pharmacy participants. The My Choice Weight Management Programme improved the general health status of participants between recruitment and session twelve as measured by the validated SF-12 questionnaire. While cost data is presented in this report, it is unclear which provider type delivered the Programme more cost-effectively. Attendance rates on the Programme were consistently better among pharmacy participants than among GP participants. The opinions of programme participants (both those who attended regularly and those who failed to attend as expected) and programme providers were explored via semi-structured interviews and, in the case of the participants, a selfcompletion postal questionnaire. These data suggest that the Programme was almost uniformly popular with both the deliverers of the Programme and participants on the Programme with 83% of questionnaire respondents indicating that they would be happy to recommend the Programme to other people looking to lose weight. Our recommendations, based on the evidence provided in this report, include: a. Any consideration of an extension to the study also giving comparable consideration to an extension of the Programme evaluation. The feasibility of assigning participants to a pharmacy provider or a GP provider via a central allocation system should also be examined. This would address imbalances in participant recruitment levels between provider type and allow for more accurate comparison of the effectiveness in the delivery of the Programme between GP surgeries and community pharmacies by increasing the homogeneity of participants at each type of site and increasing the number of Programme participants overall. b. Widespread dissemination of the findings from this review of the My Choice Weight Management Project should be undertaken through a variety of channels. c. Consideration of the inclusion of the following key aspects of the My Choice Weight Management Project in any extension to the Programme: i. The provision of training to staff in GP surgeries and community pharmacies responsible for delivery of the Programme prior to patient recruitment. ii. Maintaining the level of healthcare staff input to the Programme. iii. The regular schedule of appointments with Programme participants. iv. The provision of an increased variety of printed material. d. A simplification of the data collection method used by the Programme commissioners at the individual Programme delivery sites.

A comparison of the provision of the My Choice Weight Management Programme via general practitioner practices and community pharmacies in the United Kingdom

This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of a novel, community-based weight management programme delivered through general practitioner (GP) practices and community pharmacies in one city in the United Kingdom. This study used a non-randomized, retrospective, observational comparison of clinical data collected by participating GP practices and community pharmacies. Subjects were 451 overweight or obese men and women resident in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation (82% from black and minority ethnic groups, 86% women, mean age: 41.1 years, mean body mass index [BMI]: 34.5 kg m−2). Weight, waist circumference and BMI at baseline, after 12 weeks and after 9 months were measured. Costs of delivery were also analysed. Sixty-four per cent of participants lost weight after the first 12 weeks of the My Choice Weight Management Programme. There was considerable dropout. Mean percentage weight loss (last observation carried forward) was 1.9% at 12 weeks and 1.9% at final follow-up (9 months). There was no significant difference in weight loss between participants attending GP practices and those attending pharmacies at both 12 weeks and at final follow-up. Costs per participant were higher via community pharmacy which was attributable to better attendance at sessions among community pharmacy participants than among GP participants. The My Choice Weight Management Programme produced modest reductions in weight at 12 weeks and 9 months. Such programmes may not be sufficient to tackle the obesity epidemic.

Description and preliminary results from a structured specialist behavioural weight management group intervention:Specialist Lifestyle Management (SLiM) programme

Background -  Specialist Lifestyle Management (SLiM) is a structured patient education and self-management group weight management programme. Each session is run monthly over a 6-month period providing a less intensive long-term approach. The groups are patient-centred incorporating educational, motivational, behavioural and cognitive elements. The theoretical background, programme structure and preliminary results of SLiM are presented. Subjects/methods - The study was a pragmatic service evaluation of obese patients with a body mass index (BMI) ≥35 kg/m2 with comorbidity or ≥40 kg/m2 without comorbidity referred to a specialist weight management service in the West Midlands, UK. 828 patients were enrolled within SLiM over a 48-month period. Trained facilitators delivered the programme. Preliminary anonymised data were analysed using the intention-to-treat principle. The primary outcome measure was weight loss at 3 and 6 months with comparisons between completers and non-completers performed. The last observation carried forward was used for missing data. Results - Of the 828 enrolled within SLiM, 464 completed the programme (56%). The mean baseline weight was 135 kg (BMI=49.1 kg/m2) with 87.2% of patients having a BMI≥40 kg/m2 and 12.4% with BMI≥60 kg/m2. The mean weight change of all patients enrolled was −4.1 kg (95% CI −3.6 to −4.6 kg, p=0.0001) at the end of SLiM, with completers (n=464) achieving −5.5 kg (95% CI −4.2 to −6.2 kg, p=0.0001) and non-completers achieving −2.3 kg (p=0.0001). The majority (78.6%) who attended the 6-month programme achieved weight loss with 32.3% achieving a ≥5% weight loss. Conclusions - The SLiM programme is an effective group intervention for the management of severe and complex obesity.

Comparison of weight loss outcomes between obese patients with and without Type 2 diabetes attending a weight management focused structured educational group

Aims: Specialist lifestyle management (SLiM) is a medically supported dietetically led structured group education and self-management programme focusing on weight management. Obese patients with Type 2 diabetes are perceived to find it more difficult to lose weight compared with those without diabetes. We aimed to compare the weight loss achieved by obese patients with or without Type 2 diabetes completing the SLiM programme. Methods: A prospective analysis of patients attending SLiM between 2009 and 2013 was conducted. Results: There were 454 obese patients (mean age 49.1 ± 11.6years, women 72.5%, body mass index 49.8 ± 9.3kg/m2, weight137.3 ± 28kg). 152/454 patients (33%) had Type 2 diabetes of which 31 (20.4%) were insulin treated. Patients with Type 2diabetes were older (52.4 ± 11.3 vs 47.5 ± 11.4 years, p < 0.001). SLiM resulted in significant weight loss in patients with (136.5 ± 27 vs 130.2 ± 25.3, p < 0.001) or without (137.6 ± 29 vs 132.6 ± 28.4, p < 0.001) Type 2 diabetes. Weight loss was comparable between patients with and without Type 2 diabetes (6.1 ± 7.9 vs5.1 ± 7kg, p = 0.2). The proportion of patients achieving ≥ 10%weight loss was similar between patients with and without Type 2diabetes (10.5% vs 9.9%, p = 0.4). Insulin-treated patients lost similar weight to those not treated with insulin (6.3 ± 9.4 vs 6.1 ± 7.6kg, p = 0.9). After adjustment for age, sex, referral weight and medications, Type 2 diabetes did not predict weight change during the SLiM programme (b = 0.3, p = 0.5). Conclusions: Attending the SLiM groups produces a significant weight loss in patients with Type 2 diabetes which is comparable to those without Type 2 diabetes. Insulin-treated patients lost similar weight to those not on insulin. Weight gain with Type 2 diabetes and insulin treatment is not ‘unavoidable’ if patients receive the appropriate support and education.

Tailoring treatment to the individual in type 2 diabetes practical guidance from the Global Partnership for Effective Diabetes Management

Good glycaemic control continues to be the most effective therapeutic manoeuvre to reduce the risk of development and/or progression of microvascular disease, and therefore remains the cornerstone of diabetes management despite recent scepticism about tight glucose control strategies. The impact on macrovascular complications is still a matter of debate, and so glycaemic control strategies should be placed in the context of multifactorial intervention to address all cardiovascular risk factors. Approaches to achieve glycaemic targets should always ensure patient safety, and results from recent landmark outcome studies support the need for appropriate individualisation of glycaemic targets and of the means to achieve these targets, with the ultimate aim to optimise outcomes and minimise adverse events, such as hypoglycaemia and marked weight gain. The primary goal of the Global Partnership for Effective Diabetes Management is the provision of practical guidance to improve patient outcomes and, in this article, we aim to support healthcare professionals in appropriately tailoring type 2 diabetes treatment to the individual. Patient groups requiring special consideration are identified, including newly diagnosed individuals with type 2 diabetes but no complications, individuals with a history of inadequate glycaemic control, those with a history of cardiovascular disease, children and individuals at risk of hypoglycaemia. Practical guidance specific to each group is provided.

SGLT inhibitors in management of diabetes

The two main sodium-glucose cotransporters (SGLTs), SGLT1 and SGLT2, provide new therapeutic targets to reduce hyperglycaemia in patients with diabetes. SGLT1 enables the small intestine to absorb glucose and contributes to the reabsorption of glucose filtered by the kidney. SGLT2 is responsible for reabsorption of most of the glucose filtered by the kidney. Inhibitors with varying specificities for these transporters (eg, dapagliflozin, canagliflozin, and empagliflozin) can slow the rate of intestinal glucose absorption and increase the renal elimination of glucose into the urine. Results of randomised clinical trials have shown the blood glucose-lowering efficacy of SGLT inhibitors in type 2 diabetes when administered as monotherapy or in addition to other glucose-lowering therapies including insulin. Increased renal glucose elimination also assists weight loss and could help to reduce blood pressure. Effective SGLT2 inhibition needs adequate glomerular filtration and might increase risk of urinary tract and genital infection, and excessive inhibition of SGLT1 can cause gastro-intestinal symptoms. However, the insulin-independent mechanism of action of SGLT inhibitors seems to offer durable glucose-lowering efficacy with low risk of clinically significant hypoglycaemia at any stage in the natural history of type 2 diabetes. SGLT inhibition might also be considered in conjunction with insulin therapy in type 1 diabetes. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd.

"We don't need no education" - Or do we? Management education and alumni adoption of strategy tools

Despite concerns about the relevance of management education, there is relatively little evidence about whether graduates use the management tools and concepts they are taught. We address this gap with evidence from a survey of business school alumni adoption of tools typically taught in strategic management courses. Our findings show that four educational characteristics-level of formal education, frequency of management training, specificity of strategic management education, and time elapsed since formal education-drive adoption of strategy tools. Specifically, features such as postgraduate over undergraduate qualifications and frequent exposure to management training predispose greater user of strategy tools. However, other factors, such as time elapsed since formal education, are not as great a predictor of variation in use. We conclude with a predictive model of the relative weight and importance of educational and demographic characteristics on strategy tool adoption and discuss our findings in light of the relevance debate. © The Author(s) 2013.

Nutritional management of blood glucose levels

Background and Objectives: Nutritional management of blood glucose levels is a strategic target in the prevention and management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), applicable across the population. To implement a successful strategy it is essential to understand the impact of dietary modulation on the postprandial rise in blood glucose concentrations. Methods: Using the highest quality data, a systematic and comprehensive literature review was undertaken. Included in this review were the major macronutrients (carbohydrate, pro-tein, fat), micronutrient vitamins and minerals, non-nutrient phytochemicals and additional foods such as low-calorie sweeteners, vinegar and alcohol. Results: The strongest corroboration of efficacy for improving glucose homeostasis was for insoluble and moderately fermentable cereal-based fiber and mono-unsaturated fatty acids as replacement of saturated fat. Postprandial glycaemia was decreased by intake of viscous soluble fiber and the predominant mechanism of action was considered to be by delaying absorption of co-ingested carbohydrates. There was weaker but substantial evidence that certain phytochemical-rich foods were likely to be effective. This may be associated with the su-ggestion that the gut microbiota plays an important role in me-tabolic regulation, which includes provision of phytochemical and other metabolites. Conclusions: Based on the evidence, it is clear that dietary components have significant and clinically relevant effects on blood glucose modulation. This suggests that employing a dietary regimen to attenuate the postprandial rise in blood glucose levels along with previously identified targets (reducing excess body weight and an increase in physical activity) will benefit the health of the population and limit the increasing worldwide incidence of T2D.