Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/31308
Appears in Collections:Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport Journal Articles
Peer Review Status: Refereed
Title: Weight assessment and the provision of weight management advice in primary care: a cross-sectional survey of self-reported practice among general practitioners and practice nurses in the United Kingdom
Other Titles: Weight management assessment and advice in primary care
Author(s): Critchlow, Nathan
Rosenberg, Gillian
Rumgay, Harriet
Petty, Robert
Vohra, Jyotsna
Contact Email: nathan.critchlow@stir.ac.uk
Keywords: Obesity
Weight management
Primary Care
Survey
Weight Assessment
Overweight
General Practitioners
Nurses
Obesity Policy
Issue Date: 2020
Date Deposited: 19-Jun-2020
Citation: Critchlow N, Rosenberg G, Rumgay H, Petty R & Vohra J (2020) Weight assessment and the provision of weight management advice in primary care: a cross-sectional survey of self-reported practice among general practitioners and practice nurses in the United Kingdom [Weight management assessment and advice in primary care]. BMC Family Practice, 21, Art. No.: 111. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-020-01184-z
Abstract: Background: Although primary care settings provide a large-scale and high-reach opportunity for weight management and obesity prevention, the proportion of adults in the United Kingdom (UK) who report receiving weight management advice is limited. This study examines the self-reported frequency of assessing weight and providing weight management advice by General Practitioners (GPs) and Practice Nurses (PNs) working in primary care in the UK, and differences by practitioner characteristics. Methods: Cross-sectional survey with GPs and PNs in the UK (n = 2020), conducted January–March 2017. A mock consultation exercise assessed what factors led to calculating a patient’s Body Mass Index (BMI) and whether weight management advice was given after determining the patient had an obese BMI. For all patients, practitioners were asked how often they calculated BMI, how often they gave weight management advice to patients with an obese BMI, and how often they utilised different advice or referral options (each: Always/Often vs. Less often/Never). Binary logistic regressions examined whether frequency of assessing weight and providing advice was associated with practitioner characteristics. Results: In the mock consultation, physical cues (40%) were most likely to prompt calculation of BMI, and half of practitioners (56%) provided weight management advice after determining the patient had an obese BMI, with GPs less likely to do so than PNs (Odds Ratio [OR] = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.47–0.75). Half of practitioners (58%) said they calculated the BMI of all patients Always/Often, with GPs less likely to do so than PNs (OR = 0.27, 95% CI: 0.21–0.34). Three quarters (78%) said they provided weight management advice to patients with an obese BMI Always/Often, with GPs less likely to do so than PNs (OR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.47–0.85). Weight management advice was provided more frequently than referrals, particularly suggesting increased physical activity (93%) and diet modification (89%). Conclusions: Consistent with previous research, the findings suggest that opportunities to provide weight management advice in primary care, including to patients with an obese BMI, are potentially missed. Future research should test alternative mechanisms to increase weight assessment and advice provision, examine the effectiveness of advice frequently given, and seek solutions to reported barriers for providing weight management advice.
DOI Link: 10.1186/s12875-020-01184-z
Rights: This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Licence URL(s): http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Critchlow et al BMCFamPract2020.pdfFulltext - Published Version612.13 kBAdobe PDFView/Open



This item is protected by original copyright



A file in this item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons

Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

The metadata of the records in the Repository are available under the CC0 public domain dedication: No Rights Reserved https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.