You are here

Article Text

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

XML
General Paediatrics
Original research
Health-related quality of life after camp-based family obesity treatment: an RCT
  1. Beate Benestad1,2,
  2. Tor-Ivar Karlsen3,
  3. Milada Cvancarova Småstuen1,
  4. Samira Lekhal1,
  5. Jens Kristoffer Hertel1,
  6. Silje Steinsbekk4,5,
  7. Ronette L Kolotkin1,6,
  8. Rønnaug Astri Ødegård7,8,
  9. Jøran Hjelmesæth1,9
  1. 1 Department of Medicine, Vestfold Hospital Trust, The Morbid Obesity Centre (MOC), Tønsberg, Norway
  2. 2 Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
  3. 3 Faculty of Health and Sports Sciences, University of Agder, Grimstad, Norway
  4. 4 Department of Psychology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway
  5. 5 Department of Social Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway
  6. 6 Quality of Life Consulting, Durham, North Carolina, USA
  7. 7 The Obesity Centre, St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway
  8. 8 Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway
  9. 9 Department of Endocrinology, Morbid Obesity and Preventive Medicine, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
  1. Correspondence to Dr Beate Benestad; beate.benestad{at}siv.no

Abstract

Objective To compare the effects of a 2-year camp-based immersion family treatment for obesity with an outpatient family-based treatment for obesity on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in two generations.

Design Randomised controlled trial.

Setting Rehabilitation clinic, tertiary care hospital and primary care.

Patients Families with at least one child (7–12 years) and one parent, both with obesity.

Interventions Summer camp for 2 weeks, with four repetition weekends, or lifestyle school, including four outpatient days over 4 weeks. Behavioural techniques to promote a healthier lifestyle.

Main outcome measures Children’s and parents’ HRQoL were assessed using generic and obesity-specific measures. Outcomes were analysed using linear mixed models according to intention to treat, and multiple imputations were used for missing data.

Results Ninety children (50% girls) with a mean (SD) age of 9.7 (1.2) years and body mass index 28.7 (3.9) kg/m2 were included in the analyses. Summer camp children had an estimated mean (95% CI) of 5.3 (0.4 to 10.1) points greater improvement in adiposity-specific HRQoL score at 2 years compared with the lifestyle school children, and this improvement was even larger in the parent proxy-report, where mean difference was 7.3 (95% CI 2.3 to 12.2). Corresponding effect sizes were 0.33 and 0.44. Generic HRQoL questionnaires revealed no significant differences between treatment groups in either children or parents from baseline to 2 years.

Conclusions A 2-year family camp-based immersion obesity treatment programme had significantly larger effects on obesity-specific HRQoL in children’s self-report and parent proxy-reports in children with obesity compared with an outpatient family-based treatment programme.

Trial registration number NCT01110096.

  • obesity
  • patient perspective
  • rehabilitation

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjpo-2018-000413

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors BB carried out the analyses, drafted the initial manuscript, reviewed and revised the manuscript and approved the final manuscript as submitted. T-IK designed parts of the study protocol, carried out the multiple imputations, gave advice on the initial manuscript, reviewed and revised the manuscript and approved the final manuscript as submitted. MCS gave advice on the statistical analyses, reviewed and revised the manuscript and approved the final manuscript as submitted. SL coordinated and supervised parts of the data collection at one of the outpatient clinics, reviewed and revised the manuscript and approved the final manuscript as submitted. JKH gave advice on data preparation, contributed to discussion, reviewed and revised the manuscript and approved the final manuscript as submitted. SS contributed to discussion, reviewed and revised the manuscript and approved the final manuscript as submitted. RLK contributed to discussion, reviewed and revised the manuscript and approved the final manuscript as submitted. RAØ designed the study and wrote the protocol, coordinated and supervised data collection at one of the outpatient clinics, reviewed and revised the manuscript and approved the final manuscript as submitted. JH designed the study and wrote the protocol, reviewed the initial manuscript, reviewed and revised the manuscript and approved the final manuscript as submitted. All authors approved the final manuscript as submitted and are accountable for all aspects of the work.

    • Funding Research relating to this article was funded by the Norwegian Ministry of Health and Care Services, the Norwegian Foundation for Health and Rehabilitation and GjensidigeStiftelsen. The first author has been funded by a public research grant from the South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority.

    • Disclaimer None of the funding parties had a role in design or conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis or interpretation of the data; or preparation, review or approval of the manuscript.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Ethics approval The study was approved by the Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics (2009/176).

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

    • Patient consent for publication Not required.