Obesity Abstracts

Background: Theoretical health frameworks inform healthcare practice to enhance health changes. One such framework is the Attitudes, Social Influence and Self-efficacy (ASE) Model (De Vres, 1988). Whilst initial weight loss is achievable, maintenance of long-term weight loss is a goal that is difficult to achieve. Collaborative approaches between patients and healthcare professionals could help identify suitable & effective treatments. This study aimed to describe the views of patients attending an NHS weight management service with regard to the support needed to maintain weight loss after an initial intervention and how this may improve our weight management service.

Methods: Data was collected using a questionnaire and opportunistic sampling. Mixed-methods data analysis was used to align quantitative findings with deeper qualitative meanings. Twenty-five participants (17 female) were included with 17 participants completing a group intervention and 8 participants completed a 1-to-1intervention with a dietitian. Thematic analysis was used via an inductive approach. Data was coded manually then organised into main- and sub-themes.

Results: 54% of participants identified losing weight as a main goal. 72% of patients lost weight (mean ± S.D. =−2.71±2.87 kg) and 16% of patients gained weight (mean ± S.D. =1.91±2.61 kg). Overall, 80% of participants positively rated their weight loss, 82.6% positively rated their confidence levels to manage their weight and 100% of participants were satisfied with treatment received. Support emerged as a key theme in relation to support and keeping participants on track. Face to face support methods were positively rated and non- face to face support methods were negatively rated, regardless of previous treatment received. Thematic analysis identified 5 main themes linked to reaching goals and key learnings. These were achieving a healthy lifestyle, improving emotional well-being, intrinsic factors, extrinsic factors and self-management skills. Weight trajectory did not influence self-efficacy, the type of intervention was unrelated to preference of support technique and participants did not desire interaction via technological formats (e.g. telephone or email).

Conclusion: This research found readily available support and such support taking place in person is a main priority. More research could shed further light on these findings.