Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Patient Preferences for Lifestyle Management in a Multi-site Randomized Lifestyle Trial for Remission of the Metabolic Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Randomized behavioral clinical trials are the gold standard for evaluating efficacy of a behavioral treatment. However, because participants are generally unblinded to treatment, preference for a specific treatment option can lead to biased results and/or reduced treatment efficacy. The purpose was to describe the relative frequency and correlates of existence of a preference and patient preference for either an in-person group-based or a remote self-directed, lifestyle treatment prior to randomization to one of these treatments.

METHODS: The Enhanced Lifestyles for Metabolic Syndrome (ELM) trial is a multi-site behavioral clinical trial that compares efficacy of a group-based vs. a self-directed approach to lifestyle change on 2-year remission of the metabolic syndrome. Prior to randomization, participants were asked whether they had a preference for a particular treatment and, if so, which approach they preferred. Baseline data were used for a series of logistic regression models to determine behavioral correlates of treatment preference, independent of socioeconomic factors.

RESULTS: Of the 331 participants, 131 (39.6%) had no preference for either treatment. Among the 200 with a preference, 56 (28.0%) preferred the self-directed program. Strength of a pre-existing habit of eating vegetables on most days was an independent correlate of no preference (adjusted OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.01-1.61; p = 0.03) and preference for a self-directed program (adjusted OR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.09-2.22; p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION: A pre-existing habit of eating vegetables was associated with no preference and preference for a less intensive lifestyle treatment. Post-treatment follow-up of the trial results will determine if concordance between preference and treatment assignment influences outcomes.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app