Implementation and evaluation of the 5As framework of obesity management in primary care: design of the 5As Team (5AsT) randomized control trial

Denise L Campbell-Scherer, Jodie Asselin, Adedayo M Osunlana, Sheri Fielding, Robin Anderson, Christian F Rueda-Clausen, Jeffrey A Johnson, Ayodele A Ogunleye, Andrew Cave, Donna Manca, Arya M Sharma, Denise L Campbell-Scherer, Jodie Asselin, Adedayo M Osunlana, Sheri Fielding, Robin Anderson, Christian F Rueda-Clausen, Jeffrey A Johnson, Ayodele A Ogunleye, Andrew Cave, Donna Manca, Arya M Sharma

Abstract

Background: Obesity is a pressing public health concern, which frequently presents in primary care. With the explosive obesity epidemic, there is an urgent need to maximize effective management in primary care. The 5As of Obesity Management™ (5As) are a collection of knowledge tools developed by the Canadian Obesity Network. Low rates of obesity management visits in primary care suggest provider behaviour may be an important variable. The goal of the present study is to increase frequency and quality of obesity management in primary care using the 5As Team (5AsT) intervention to change provider behaviour.

Methods/design: The 5AsT trial is a theoretically informed, pragmatic randomized controlled trial with mixed methods evaluation. Clinic-based multidisciplinary teams (RN/NP, mental health, dietitians) will be randomized to control or the 5AsT intervention group, to participate in biweekly learning collaborative sessions supported by internal and external practice facilitation. The learning collaborative content addresses provider-identified barriers to effective obesity management in primary care. Evidence-based shared decision making tools will be co-developed and iteratively tested by practitioners. Evaluation will be informed by the RE-AIM framework. The primary outcome measure, to which participants are blinded, is number of weight management visits/full-time equivalent (FTE) position. Patient-level outcomes will also be assessed, through a longitudinal cohort study of patients from randomized practices. Patient outcomes include clinical (e.g., body mass index [BMI], blood pressure), health-related quality of life (SF-12, EQ5D), and satisfaction with care. Qualitative data collected from providers and patients will be evaluated using thematic analysis to understand the context, implementation and effectiveness of the 5AsT program.

Discussion: The 5AsT trial will provide a wide range of insights into current practices, knowledge gaps and barriers that limit obesity management in primary practice. The use of existing resources, collaborative design, practice facilitation, and integrated feedback loops cultivate an applicable, adaptable and sustainable approach to increasing the quantity and quality of weight management visits in primary care.

Trial registration: NCT01967797.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
5AsT study overview. The upper portion pertains to the provider-level study and shows intervention and evaluation timeline. The lower portion pertains to the parallel patient-level study.

References

    1. Wass J, Finer N. Action on obesity: comprehensive care for all. Clin Med. 2013;13(1):4–5. doi: 10.7861/clinmedicine.13-1-4.
    1. Wadden TA, Volger S, Tsai AG, Sarwer DB, Berkowitz RI, Diewald L, Carvajal R, Moran CH, Vetter M. Managing obesity in primary care practice: an overview with perspective from the POWER-UP study. Int J Obes. 2013;37:S3–S11.
    1. Colman R, Hayward K. Cost of obesity in Alberta, summary report from Alberta health services (AHS)/research and evaluation unit. [ ]
    1. Cane J, O’Connor D, Michie S. Validation of the theoretical domains framework for use in behaviour change and implementation research. Implement Sci. 2012;7(1):37. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-7-37.
    1. Glasgow RE, Vogt TM, Boles SM. Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework. Am J Public Health. 1999;89(9):1322–1327. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.89.9.1322.
    1. Manns BJ, Tonelli M, Zhang J, Campbell DJ, Sargious P, Ayyalasomayajula B, Clement F, Johnson JA, Laupacis A, Lewanczuk R, McBrien K, Hemmelgarn BR. Enrolment in primary care networks: impact on outcomes and processes of care for patients with diabetes. CMAJ. 2012;184(2):E144–E152. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.110755.
    1. Vallis M, Piccinini–Vallis H, Sharma AM, Freedhoff Y. Clinical review: modified 5 as minimal intervention for obesity counseling in primary care. Can Fam Physician. 2013;59(1):27–31.
    1. Lau DC, Douketis JD, Morrison KM, Hramiak IM, Sharma AM, Ur E. 2006 Canadian clinical practice guidelines on the management and prevention of obesity in adults and children [summary] CMAJ. 2007;176(8):S1–S117. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.061409.
    1. Schlair S, Moore S, McMacken M, Jay M. How to deliver high-quality obesity counseling in primary care using the 5As framework. JCOM. 2012;19(5):221–229.
    1. Rueda-Clausen CF, Benterud E, Bond T, Olszowka R, Vallis MT, Sharma AM. Effect of implementing the 5As of Obesity Management framework on provider-patient interactions in primary care. Clin Obes. 2014;4(1):39–44. doi: 10.1111/cob.12038.
    1. Helfrich CD, Weiner BJ, McKinney MM, Minasian L. Determinants of implementation effectiveness adapting a framework for complex innovations. Med Care Res Rev. 2007;64(3):279–303. doi: 10.1177/1077558707299887.
    1. Campbell-Scherer D. The 11th hour time for EBM to return to first principles? Evid Based Med. 2012;17(4):103–104. doi: 10.1136/ebmed-2012-100578.
    1. Glasgow RE, Klesges LM, Dzewaltowski DA, Estabrooks PA, Vogt TM. Evaluating the impact of health promotion programs: using the RE-AIM framework to form summary measures for decision making involving complex issues. Health Educ Res. 2006;21(5):688–694. doi: 10.1093/her/cyl081.
    1. Glasgow RE. RE-AIMing research for application: ways to improve evidence for family medicine. J Am Board Fam Med. 2006;19(1):11–19. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.19.1.11.
    1. Morse JM. Qualitative Research Methods for Health Professionals. 2. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 1995.
    1. Guest G, MacQueen KM, Namey EE. Applied Thematic Analysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2011.
    1. Boyatzis RE. Transforming Qualitative Information: Thematic Analysis and Code Development. London: Sage; 1998.
    1. Fereday J, Muir-Cochrane E. Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: a hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. Int J Qual Methods. 2008;5(1):80–92.
    1. Kind P. In: Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials. 2. Spilker B, editor. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott-Raven Publishers; 1996. The EuroQoL Instrument: An Index of Health-Related Quality of Life; pp. 191–201.
    1. EQ-5D. [ ]
    1. Ware J, Kosinski M, Keller S. A 12-item short-form health survey: construction of scales and preliminary test of reliability and validity. Med Care. 1996;34:220–226. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199603000-00003.
    1. Glasgow R, Wagner E, Schaefer J, Mahoney L, Reid R, Greene S. Development and validation of the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) Med Care. 2005;43(5):436–444. doi: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000160375.47920.8c.
    1. Donner A, Klar N. Design and Analysis of Cluster Randomization Trials in Health Research. London: Arnold Publishers; 2000.
    1. Gruen RL, Elliott JH, Nolan ML, Lawton PD, Parkhill A, McLaren CJ, Lavis JN. Sustainability science: an integrated approach for health-programme planning. Lancet. 2008;372(9649):1579–1589. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61659-1.
    1. Thorpe KE, Zwarenstein M, Oxman AD, Treweek S, Furberg CD, Altman DG, Tunis S, Bergel E, Harvey I, Magid DJ, Chalkidou K. A pragmatic-explanatory continuum indicator summary (PRECIS): a tool to help trial designers. CMAJ. 2009;180(10):E47–E57. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.090523.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe