Enablers and barriers to implementing obesity assessments in clinical practice: a rapid mixed-methods systematic review

Author:

Atlantis EvanORCID,Chimoriya Ritesh,Seifu Canaan NegashORCID,Peters Kath,Murphy Gill,Carr Bernadette,Lim DavidORCID,Fahey PORCID

Abstract

ObjectivesThis systematic review aims to improve our knowledge of enablers and barriers to implementing obesity-related anthropometric assessments in clinical practice.DesignA mixed-methods systematic review.Data sourcesMedline, Embase and CINAHL to November 2021.Eligibility criteriaQuantitative studies that reported patient factors associated with obesity assessments in clinical practice (general practice or primary care); and qualitative studies that reported views of healthcare professionals about enablers and barriers to their implementation.Data extraction and synthesisWe used random-effects meta-analysis to pool ratios for categorical predictors reported in ≥3 studies expressed as pooled risk ratio (RR) with 95% CI, applied inverse variance weights, and investigated statistical heterogeneity (I2), publication bias (Egger’s test), and sensitivity analyses. We used reflexive thematic analysis for qualitative data and applied a convergent integrated approach to synthesis.ResultsWe reviewed 22 quantitative (observational) and 3 qualitative studies published between 2004 and 2020. All had ≥50% of the quality items for risk of bias assessments. Obesity assessment in clinical practice was positively associated with patient factors: female sex (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.50, I299.8%, mostly UK/USA), socioeconomic deprivation (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.24, I273.9%, UK studies), non-white race/ethnicity (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.57, I299.6%) and comorbidities (RR 2.11, 95% CI 1.60 to 2.79, I299.6%, consistent across most countries). Obesity assessment was also most common in the heaviest body mass index group (RR 1.55, 95% CI 0.99 to 2.45, I299.6%). Views of healthcare professionals were positive about obesity assessments when linked to patient health (convergent with meta-analysis for comorbidities) and if part of routine practice, but negative about their role, training, time, resources and incentives in the healthcare system.ConclusionsOur evidence synthesis revealed several important enablers and barriers to obesity assessments that should inform healthcare professionals and relevant stakeholders to encourage adherence to clinical practice guideline recommendations.

Funder

iNova Pharmaceuticals (Australia) Pty Ltd

National Association of Clinical Obesity Services Incorporated

Western Sydney University

Publisher

BMJ

Subject

General Medicine

Reference59 articles.

1. World Health Organization . Obesity and overweight. Secondary Obesity and overweight, 2021. Available: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/obesity-and-overweight

2. The challenge for global health systems in preventing and managing obesity;Wolfenden;Obes Rev,2019

3. Management of overweight and obesity in primary care-a systematic overview of international evidence-based guidelines;Semlitsch;Obes Rev,2019

4. Gaps to bridge: misalignment between perception, reality and actions in obesity;Caterson;Diabetes Obes Metab,2019

5. The challenge of keeping it off, a descriptive systematic review of high-quality, follow-up studies of obesity treatments;Nordmo;Obes Rev,2020

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3