Primary Care Patients' and Providers' Perspectives about an Online Weight Management Program: a Qualitative Study.

Ronen Rozenblum, Barbara A De La Cruz, Nyryan V Nolido, Ihorma Adighibe, Kristina Secinaro, Katherine D McManus, Florencia Halperin, Jason P Block, David W Bates, Heather J Baer
Author Information
  1. Ronen Rozenblum: Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. rrozenblum@bwh.harvard.edu.
  2. Barbara A De La Cruz: Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
  3. Nyryan V Nolido: Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
  4. Ihorma Adighibe: Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
  5. Kristina Secinaro: Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
  6. Katherine D McManus: Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
  7. Florencia Halperin: Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
  8. Jason P Block: Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
  9. David W Bates: Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
  10. Heather J Baer: Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Primary care providers (PCPs) often take the lead role in caring for patients with overweight and obesity; however, few PCPs counsel patients about weight loss. Online weight management programs that are integrated within primary care may help address this gap in care.
OBJECTIVE: To identify perceptions of and experience with online weight management programs in general and with a proposed online program, to identify barriers to use, and to improve the design and content of our intervention, which included an online program plus population health management (PHM) support from primary care practices.
DESIGN: A mixed qualitative methods study including three patient focus groups and seven semi-structured interviews with healthcare providers.
PARTICIPANTS: A total of 13 adult patients (age range, 20-70) with body mass index (BMI) 27-35 kg/m attended the focus groups. In-person semi-structured interviews were conducted with seven healthcare providers (three PCPs, two population health managers, one primary care nurse, and one registered dietitian).
MAIN MEASURES: We developed and used semi-structured focus groups and interview guides. The focus group and interviews were recorded and transcribed. Using grounded theory, we analyzed the transcripts to identify and extract common concepts and themes.
KEY RESULTS: Although patients and healthcare providers expressed positive opinions about online weight management programs, few patients had experience with them, and providers stated that such programs are not being widely implemented in primary care settings. Some participants highlighted the flexibility and low cost as strengths of online weight management tools compared with in-person programs. All participants had favorable opinions about our proposed intervention and were overwhelmingly positive about the combination of an online program and PHM support.
CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the potential value of online weight management programs and PHM support in primary care.
CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT02656693.

Keywords

Associated Data

ClinicalTrials.gov | NCT02656693

References

  1. J Fam Pract. 2001 Jun;50(6):520 [PMID: 11401738]
  2. J Gen Intern Med. 2015 Jan;30(1):107-17 [PMID: 25134692]
  3. Obes Rev. 2007 Sep;8(5):459-65 [PMID: 17716303]
  4. Am J Public Health. 1995 May;85(5):722-6 [PMID: 7733438]
  5. N Engl J Med. 2006 Oct 12;355(15):1563-71 [PMID: 17035649]
  6. Obes Res. 2003 Oct;11(10):1168-77 [PMID: 14569041]
  7. Int J Med Inform. 2013 Mar;82(3):141-58 [PMID: 23332922]
  8. Health Aff (Millwood). 2013 Feb;32(2):216-22 [PMID: 23381513]
  9. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2002 Sep;26(9):1254-60 [PMID: 12187404]
  10. Proc Nutr Soc. 2013 Feb;72(1):98-108 [PMID: 23098133]
  11. J Am Acad Nurse Pract. 2009 Apr;21(4):197-206 [PMID: 19366378]
  12. Am Fam Physician. 2001 Jun 1;63(11):2185-96 [PMID: 11417771]
  13. Obes Res. 2001 Nov;9 Suppl 4:326S-334S [PMID: 11707561]
  14. Curr Cardiovasc Risk Rep. 2012 Apr;6(2):120-134 [PMID: 23082235]
  15. Obes Res. 2003 Sep;11(9):1140-6 [PMID: 12972685]
  16. JAMA. 2005 Apr 20;293(15):1861-7 [PMID: 15840860]
  17. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2010 Feb;18(2):308-13 [PMID: 19696764]
  18. Gastroenterology. 2007 May;132(6):2087-102 [PMID: 17498505]
  19. Obes Res. 2004 Feb;12(2):320-9 [PMID: 14981225]
  20. Obes Rev. 2010 Apr;11(4):306-21 [PMID: 19754633]
  21. Acad Med. 2004 Feb;79(2):156-61 [PMID: 14744717]
  22. Med Clin North Am. 2018 Jan;102(1):35-47 [PMID: 29156186]
  23. Am J Prev Med. 2007 Oct;33(4):336-345 [PMID: 17888860]
  24. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2006 Jul-Aug;21(4):251-8; quiz 259-60 [PMID: 16823276]
  25. N Engl J Med. 2011 Nov 24;365(21):1959-68 [PMID: 22085317]
  26. J Gen Intern Med. 2014 Jan;29(1):50-8 [PMID: 24002616]
  27. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2016 Oct;4(10):821-8 [PMID: 27474214]
  28. Am J Public Health. 1999 May;89(5):764-7 [PMID: 10224993]
  29. JAMA. 2008 Mar 12;299(10):1139-48 [PMID: 18334689]
  30. JAMA. 2012 Feb 1;307(5):491-7 [PMID: 22253363]
  31. Prev Med. 1995 Nov;24(6):543-5 [PMID: 8610075]
  32. Issue Brief (Commonw Fund). 2015 May;9:1-9 [PMID: 26040018]
  33. Health Aff (Millwood). 2015 Mar;34(3):431-7 [PMID: 25732493]
  34. J Am Diet Assoc. 2007 Oct;107(10):1755-67 [PMID: 17904936]
  35. Am J Public Health. 1994 May;84(5):783-7 [PMID: 8179049]
  36. Diabetes Care. 2002 Apr;25(4):742-9 [PMID: 11919135]
  37. Am J Prev Med. 2003 Jan;24(1):108-9 [PMID: 12554031]
  38. Arch Intern Med. 2000 Apr 10;160(7):898-904 [PMID: 10761953]
  39. Obes Res. 1998 Sep;6 Suppl 2:51S-209S [PMID: 9813653]

MeSH Term

Adult
Aged
Attitude of Health Personnel
Female
Focus Groups
Humans
Internet
Male
Middle Aged
Obesity
Patient Preference
Primary Health Care
Qualitative Research
Weight Reduction Programs
Young Adult

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0careonlineweightmanagementprogramsprimaryproviderspatientsprogramfocusPCPsidentifyPHMsupportgroupssemi-structuredinterviewshealthcarePrimaryoverweightobesityOnlineexperienceproposedinterventionpopulationhealthstudythreesevenonepositiveopinionsparticipantsBACKGROUND:oftentakeleadrolecaringhowevercounsellossintegratedwithinmayhelpaddressgapOBJECTIVE:perceptionsgeneralbarriersuseimprovedesigncontentincludedpluspracticesDESIGN:mixedqualitativemethodsincludingpatientPARTICIPANTS:total13adultagerange20-70bodymassindexBMI27-35 kg/mattendedIn-personconductedtwomanagersnurseregistereddietitianMAINMEASURES:developedusedinterviewguidesgrouprecordedtranscribedUsinggroundedtheoryanalyzedtranscriptsextractcommonconceptsthemesKEYRESULTS:Althoughexpressedstatedwidelyimplementedsettingshighlightedflexibilitylowcoststrengthstoolscomparedin-personfavorableoverwhelminglycombinationCONCLUSIONS:highlightspotentialvalueCLINICALTRIALSREGISTRATION:NCT02656693CarePatients'Providers'PerspectivesWeightManagementProgram:QualitativeStudy

Similar Articles

Cited By