SCOTT D Miller - For the latest and greatest information on Feedback Informed Treatment

  • About
    • About Scott
    • Publications
  • Training and Consultation
  • Workshop Calendar
  • FIT Measures Licensing
  • FIT Software Tools
  • Online Store
  • Top Performance Blog
  • Contact Scott
info@scottdmiller.com 773.404.5130

Improving Outcomes in the Treatment of Obesity via Practice-Based Evidence: Weight Loss, Nutrition, and Work Productivity

April 9, 2010 By scottdm 4 Comments

Obesity is a large and growing problem in the United States and elsewhere.  Data gathered by the National Center for Health Statistics indicate that 33% Americans are obese.  When overweight people are added to the mix, the figure climbs to a staggering 66%!   The problem is not likely to go away soon or on its own as the same figures apply to children.

Researchers estimate that weight problems are responsible for over 300,000 deaths annually and account for 12% of healthcare costs or 100 billion–that’s right, $100,000,000,000–in the United States alone.   The overweight and obese have higher incidences of arthritis, breast cancer, heart disease, colorectal cancer, diabetes, endometrial cancer, gallbladder disease, hypertension, liver disease, back pain, sleeping problems, and stroke–not to mention the tremendous emotional, relational, and social costs.  The data are clear: the overweight are the target of discrimination in education, healthcare, and employment.  A study by Brownell and Puhl (2003), for example, found that: (1) a significant percentage of healthcare professionals admit to feeling  “repulsed” by obese person, even among those who specialize in bariatric treatment; (2) parents provide less college support to their overweight compared to “thin” children; and (3) 87% of obese individuals reported that weight prevented them from being hired for a job.

Sadly, available evidence indicates that while weight problems are “among the easiest conditions to recognize,” they remain one of the “most difficult to treat.”  Weight loss programs abound.  When was the last time you watched television and didn’t see an ad for a diet pill, program, or exercise machine?  Many work.  Few, however, lead to lasting change.

What might help?

More than a decade ago, I met Dr. Paul Faulkner, the founder and then Chief Executive Officer of Resources for Living (RFL), an innovative employee assistance program located in Austin, Texas.  I was teaching a week-long course on outcome-informed work at the Cape Cod Institute in Eastham, Massachusetts.  Paul had long searched for a way of improving outcomes and service delivery that could simultaneously be used to provide evidence of the value of treatment to purchasers–in the case of RFL, the large, multinational companies that were paying him to manage their employee assistance programs.  Thus began a long relationship between me and the management and clinical staff of RFL.  I was in Austin, Texas dozens of times providing training and consultation as well as setting up the original ORS/SRS feedback system known as ALERT, which is still in use at the organization today.  All of the original reliability, validity, norming, and response trajectories were done together with the crew at RFL.

Along the way, RFL expanded services to disease management, including depression, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, and obesity.  The “weight management” program delivered coaching and nutritional consultation via the telephone informed by ongoing measurement of outcomes and the therapeutic alliance using the SRS and ORS.  The results are impressive.  The study by Ryan Sorrell, a clinician and researcher at RFL, not only found that the program and feedback led to weight loss, but also significant improvements in distress, health eating behaviors (70%), exercise (65%), and presenteeism on the job (64%)–the latter being critical to the employers paying for the service.

Such research adds to the growing body of literature documenting the importance of “practice-based” evidence, making clear that finding the “right” or “evidence-based” approach for obesity (or any problem for that matter) is less important than finding out “what works” for each person in need of help.  With challenging, “life-style” problems, this means using ongoing feedback to inform whatever services may be deemed appropriate or necessary.  Doing so not only leads to better outcomes, but also provides real-time, real-world evidence of return on investment for those footing the bill.

Filed Under: Behavioral Health, Feedback Informed Treatment - FIT, Practice Based Evidence Tagged With: behavioral health, cdoi, cognitive-behavioral therapy, conferences, continuing education, diabetes, disease management, Dr. Paul Faulkner, evidence based medicine, evidence based practice, Hypertension, medicine, obesity, ors, outcome rating scale, practice-based evidence, public behavioral health, randomized clinical trial, session rating scale, srs, Training

Comments

  1. bernie arnesen says

    April 11, 2010 at 8:01 am

    Scott,
    First off, I’m a big fan of the SRS & ORS (I believe it’s particularly helpful for the therapist who is empathically challenged. It’s like telling such therapists “Here say thus at the begining and this at the end – it’ll give your patient the impression that you actually give a damn”)

    But… the impressive results are compared to what. I have little doubt that the outcome was a result of the SRS & ORS. But for the “non-believers” why not enhance the face validity by noting controls were used. I would imagine that the research study included the elements necessary for scientific research. So, tell us so, or leave the skeptics doubting.
    Thanks -bernie

    Reply
  2. Deb Burgard, PhD says

    August 4, 2012 at 8:34 pm

    Scott, you are not accurate in reporting most of your obesity facts. But the main problem in what you are reporting is that any intervention to change weight has to have 2-5 year data before we can say that it is any different from the endless examples of weight cycling that have come before it. The 2-5 year window is the time when almost everyone regains weight and a significant number end up heavier. Anyone making evidence-based claims needs to have that data, on everyone who started the intervention – otherwise you are merely restating the obvious that weight loss is temporarily possible, but nearly always temporary.

    The facts are: for most groups in the US, obesity rates stopped rising 5-10 years ago. The rate for children is not the same as adults, it is about half, and half of that are children who were not considered “overweight” before the definition changed in 2007, those in the 85-94th percentile. The 300,000 statistic was also debunked by the CDC (see Flegal et al., 2005) and found to be 26,000 instead – and in fact, the people who live the longest are in the “overweight” range. As for “costs of obesity,” the figure you state is tremendously inflated. Moreover, as long as we are practicing medicine by BMI-profiling, we will have wasted money spent on the 51% of the healthy people who are deemed “unhealthy” based on weight and the 18% unhealthy ones who are overlooked because their weight looks fine (see Wildman et al., 2008).

    Please stop perpetuating the misinformation that adds to the stigma of higher-weight people.

    Reply
  3. Lisa says

    August 4, 2012 at 9:18 pm

    Dr. Miller it’s concerning to say the least to see someone who is promoting “evidence based medicine” recycle a very old and repeatedly debunked piece of data.

    300,000 people are not dying annually of “obesity”. That was completely debunked by Catherine Flegal at the NIH in 2005 – seven years ago. And when you carelessly repeat bad data *you are contributing to the stigma* that you say you are concerned about.

    When Dr. Faulkner and the other folks at Resources for Living have data showing that their program has helped people keep a significant amount of weight off for (at a minimum) 2-5 years with not problematic iatrogenic side effects I’ll be very interested in a look at their work. Because that would be something new.

    Reply
  4. CJ Ross says

    August 4, 2012 at 7:54 pm

    Scott,

    I’m enjoying your blog and have been following your work since it was introduced in my graduate program.

    I was disappointed to read this entry though and URGE you to become familiar with a growing body of research that disputes inaccuracies in reporting on the “war on obesity.”

    Claims such as “obesity is responsible for 300,000 deaths” unfairly perpetuate bias and stigma against fat people.

    An additional blog post on promoting health in the workplace may be of interest as well:

    Continuing to prescribe “diet and exercise” has not gotten us anywhere but is a great way to increase weight, lower self-esteem, and put people at greater risk for eating disorders:

    https://www.sizediversityandhealth.org/content.asp?id=11&mediaID=37&action=archive

    As you say, “finding the “right” or “evidence-based” approach for obesity (or any problem for that matter) is less important than finding out “what works” for each person in need of help.” I look forward to reading about the measurement of outcomes–we CAN affect–and the therapeutic alliance using the SRS and ORS aligned with Health At Every Size® principles:

    https://www.sizediversityandhealth.org/content.asp?id=152

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

 

SEARCH

Subscribe for updates from my blog.

  

Upcoming Training

Jan
12

FIT WINTER CAFÉ


Mar
17

Feedback Informed Treatment (FIT) Intensive ONLINE


Mar
22

FIT Supervision Intensive 2021 ONLINE


Mar
30

FIT SPRING CAFÉ


Aug
02

FIT Implementation Intensive 2021


Aug
04

Training of Trainers 2021

FIT Software tools

FIT Software tools

NREPP Certified

HTML tutorial

LinkedIn

Topics of Interest:

  • Behavioral Health (110)
  • behavioral health (4)
  • Brain-based Research (2)
  • CDOI (14)
  • Conferences and Training (67)
  • deliberate practice (27)
  • Dodo Verdict (9)
  • Drug and Alcohol (3)
  • evidence-based practice (65)
  • excellence (61)
  • Feedback (38)
  • Feedback Informed Treatment – FIT (204)
  • FIT (25)
  • FIT Software Tools (12)
  • ICCE (26)
  • Implementation (7)
  • medication adherence (3)
  • obesity (1)
  • PCOMS (11)
  • Practice Based Evidence (38)
  • PTSD (4)
  • Suicide (1)
  • supervision (1)
  • Termination (1)
  • Therapeutic Relationship (8)
  • Top Performance (39)

Recent Posts

  • Developing a Sustainable Deliberate Practice Plan
  • Making Sense of Client Feedback
  • Umpires and Psychotherapists
  • Augmenting the Two-Dimensional Sensory Input of Online Psychotherapy
  • Death of a Friend

Recent Comments

  • Asta on The Expert on Expertise: An Interview with K. Anders Ericsson
  • Michael McCarthy on Culture and Psychotherapy: What Does the Research Say?
  • Jim Reynolds on Culture and Psychotherapy: What Does the Research Say?
  • gloria sayler on Culture and Psychotherapy: What Does the Research Say?
  • Joseph Maizlish on Culture and Psychotherapy: What Does the Research Say?

Tags

addiction Alliance behavioral health brief therapy Carl Rogers CBT cdoi common factors conferences continuing education denmark evidence based medicine evidence based practice Evolution of Psychotherapy excellence feedback feedback informed treatment healthcare holland icce international center for cliniclal excellence medicine mental health meta-analysis Norway NREPP ors outcome measurement outcome rating scale post traumatic stress practice-based evidence psychology psychometrics psychotherapy psychotherapy networker public behavioral health randomized clinical trial SAMHSA session rating scale srs supershrinks sweden Therapist Effects therapy Training