Variability in engagement and progress in efficacious integrated collaborative care for primary care patients with obesity and depression: within-treatment analysis in the RAINBOW trial.

Lv N, Xiao L, Majd M, Lavori PW, Smyth JM, Rosas LG, Venditti EM, Snowden MB, Lewis MA, Ward E, Lesser L, Williams LM, Azar KMJ, Ma J., PLoS One. 15(4):e0231743. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0231743. eCollection 2020., 2020 Apr 21

Investigators

Kristen Azar, R.N., BSN, MSN/MPH, Investigator

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The RAINBOW randomized clinical trial validated the efficacy of an integrated collaborative care intervention for obesity and depression in primary care, although the effect was modest. To inform intervention optimization, this study investigated within-treatment variability in participant engagement and progress.

METHODS: Data were collected in 2014-2017 and analyzed post hoc in 2018. Cluster analysis evaluated patterns of change in weekly self-monitored weight from week 6 up to week 52 and depression scores on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) from up to 15 individual sessions during the 12-month intervention. Chi-square tests and ANOVA compared weight loss and depression outcomes objectively measured by blinded assessors to validate differences among categories of treatment engagement and progress defined based on cluster analysis results.

RESULTS: Among 204 intervention participants (50.9 [SD, 12.2] years, 71% female, 72% non-Hispanic White, BMI 36.7 [6.9], PHQ-9 14.1 [3.2]), 31% (n = 63) had poor engagement, on average completing self-monitored weight in <3 of 46 weeks and <5 of 15 sessions. Among them, 50 (79%) discontinued the intervention by session 6 (week 8). Engaged participants (n = 141; 69%) self-monitored weight for 11-22 weeks, attended almost all 15 sessions, but showed variable treatment progress based on patterns of change in self-monitored weight and PHQ-9 scores over 12 months. Three patterns of weight change (%) represented minimal weight loss (n = 50, linear β1 = -0.06, quadratic β2 = 0.001), moderate weight loss (n = 61, β1 = -0.28, β2 = 0.002), and substantial weight loss (n = 12, β1 = -0.53, β2 = 0.005). Three patterns of change in PHQ-9 scores represented moderate depression without treatment progress (n = 40, intercept β0 = 11.05, β1 = -0.11, β2 = 0.002), moderate depression with treatment progress (n = 20, β0 = 12.90, β1 = -0.42, β2 = 0.006), and milder depression with treatment progress (n = 81, β0 = 7.41, β1 = -0.23, β2 = 0.003). The patterns diverged within 6-8 weeks and persisted throughout the intervention. Objectively measured weight loss and depression outcomes were significantly worse among participants with poor engagement or poor progress on either weight or PHQ-9 than those showing progress on both.

CONCLUSIONS: Participants demonstrating poor engagement or poor progress could be identified early during the intervention and were more likely to fail treatment at the end of the intervention. This insight could inform individualized and timely optimization to enhance treatment efficacy.

Pubmed Abstract

Pubmed AbstractOpens New Window