Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.

Detailed Search Results

Mobile-based intervention intended to stop obesity in preschool-aged children: the MINISTOP randomized controlled trial
Nystrom CD, Sandin S, Henriksson P, Henriksson H, Trolle-Lagerros Y, Larsson C, Maddison R, Ortega FB, Pomeroy J, Ruiz JR, Silfvernagel K, Timpka T, Lof M
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2017 Jun;105(6):1327-1335
clinical trial
7/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: Yes; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: Yes; Adequate follow-up: Yes; Intention-to-treat analysis: No; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed*

BACKGROUND: Traditional obesity prevention programs are time- and cost-intensive. Mobile phone technology has been successful in changing behaviors and managing weight; however, to our knowledge, its potential in young children has yet to be examined. OBJECTIVE: We assessed the effectiveness of a mobile health (mHealth) obesity prevention program on body fat, dietary habits, and physical activity in healthy Swedish children aged 4.5 y. DESIGN: From 2014 to 2015, 315 children were randomly assigned to an intervention or control group. Parents in the intervention group received a 6-mo mHealth program. The primary outcome was fat mass index (FMI), whereas the secondary outcomes were intakes of fruits, vegetables, candy, and sweetened beverages and time spent sedentary and in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity. Composite scores for the primary and secondary outcomes were computed. RESULTS: No statistically significant intervention effect was observed for FMI between the intervention and control group (mean +/- SD -0.23 +/- 0.56 compared with -0.20 +/- 0.49 kg/m2). However, the intervention group increased their mean composite score from baseline to follow-up, whereas the control group did not (+0.36 +/- 1.47 compared with -0.06 +/- 1.33 units; p = 0.021). This improvement was more pronounced among the children with an FMI above the median (4.11 kg/m2) (p = 0.019). The odds of increasing the composite score for the 6 dietary and physical activity behaviors were 99% higher for the intervention group than the control group (p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: This mHealth obesity prevention study in preschool-aged children found no difference between the intervention and control group for FMI. However, the intervention group showed a considerably higher postintervention composite score (a secondary outcome) than the control group, especially in children with a higher FMI. Further studies targeting specific obesity classes within preschool-aged children are warranted. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02021786.
Copyright by the American Society for Clinical Nutrition.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help