News and Media

Significant publications validating BodyMedia technologies and measuring outcomes for Armband wearers. For a complete list of papers see our Bibliography

 

2010 AHA 50th Annual EPI/NPAM Joint Conference

Electronic feedback in a diet and physical activity-based lifestyle intervention for weight loss: randomized controlled trial

Xuemei Sui, Rebecca A. Meriwether, Gregory A. Hand, Sara Wilcox, Marsha Dowda, Steven N. Blair

Department of Exercise Science, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC

 

Abstract

Background: To our knowledge, no studies have evaluated whether weight loss can be promoted in overweight and obese adults through the use of a lifestyle intervention that is based on the SenseWearTM Armband (SWA) device. This study describes the development and evaluation of a technology-based lifestyle intervention designed to help individuals lose weight over 9 months. In this abstract we present data from the 4 month evaluation.

Method: We recruited 197 overweight or obese adults (81% women, 32% African-American, mean age, 47 years [SD, 11] and mean BMI, 33 [SD, 5]) from the community. They were randomized to a self-directed weight loss group (control, n=50) or 1 of 3 intervention groups: group-based lifestyle intervention weight loss program (GWL, n=49), GWL plus use of the SWA (GWL-Armband, n=49), or use of the SWA alone (Armband, n= 49). Participants in the group-based programs (GWL and GWL-Armband) received 14-15 one-hour group counseling sessions over the first 4 months, and will receive 6 follow-up phone calls. All participants received a weight loss workbook at baseline. Measurements were made at baseline and 4 months. The primary outcome was body weight. A mixed-model repeated-measures analysis compared change in the intervention groups to the control group on weight status after adjusting for age, sex, race, and education. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) models examined weight change between baseline and 4 months after adjusting for baseline weight, and the above covariates.

Results: Seventy percent of participants had body weight assessed 4 months after randomization (58% for controls and 72% for intervention groups). The control group's adjusted weight loss was 2.5 pounds which equates to 1.2% weight loss (P=0.15). Intervention groups' adjusted average weight loss (in pounds) was 3.1 for GWL (1.5% weight loss, P=0.06), 7.5 for GWL-Armband (3.7% weight loss, P<0.001), and 6.1 for Armband alone (3.0% weight loss, P<0.001). When examining participants with complete data (n=135), the GWL-Armband group lost 5.0 pounds more than the control group (P=0.02) after adjusting for baseline weight, age, sex, race, and education.

Conclusions: SWA may be a useful tool alone or to augment a standard behavioral program to promote lifestyle changes that support weight loss in overweight and obese adults.

*This study was supported by an unrestricted research grant from the BodyMedia company.

Results of the study were presented at the 2010 American Heart Association 50th Annual Joint Conference of Nutrition, Physical Activity and Metabolism & Cardiovascular Disease Epidemiology and Prevention in San Francisco, CA.

 

 

Obesity. 2007;15:825– 830.

The Efficacy of a Technology-based System in a Short-term Behavioral Weight Loss Intervention

Kristen M. Polzien,* John M. Jakicic,* Deborah F. Tate,† and Amy D. Otto*

 

Abstract

Objective: The objective was to examine the efficacy of adding a technology-based program to an in-person, behavioral weight loss intervention.

Research Methods and Procedures: Fifty-seven subjects (BMI _ 33.1 _ 2.8 kg/m2; age _ 41.3 _ 8.7 years) participated in a 12-week intervention with random assignment to Standard In-Person Behavioral Weight Control Program (SBWP) or Intermittent or Continuous Technology-Based Program (INT-TECH, CON-TECH). SBWP subjects received seven individualized weight loss sessions encouraging dietary and exercise modifications. INT-TECH and CON-TECH subjects received all SBWP components; additionally, these groups used a SenseWear Pro Armband (BodyMedia, Inc.) to monitor energy expenditure and an Internet-based program to monitor eating behaviors. These features were used by INT-TECH subjects during weeks 1, 5, and 9 and CON-TECH subjects weekly throughout the intervention.

Results: Intent-to-treat analysis revealed weight loss of 4.1 _ 2.8 kg, 3.4 _ 3.4 kg, and 6.2 _ 4.0 kg, for SBWP, INT-TECH, and CON-TECH groups, respectively (CONTECH _ INT-TECH, p _ 0.05).

Discussion: These results indicate that the technology-based program needs to be used continuously throughout the intervention period to significantly impact weight loss. Future studies should examine the long-term and independent effect of this technology on weight loss, and for whom this intervention format is most effective.

Publication: Obesity. 2007;15:825– 830.

 

 

 

Am J Clin Nutr 2007;85:742–9.

 

Evaluation of a portable device to measure daily energy expenditure in free-living adults1–3

Maxime St-Onge, Diane Mignault, David B Allison, and Rémi Rabasa-Lhoret

 

Abstract

Background: Increasing daily energy expenditure (EE) plays an important role in the prevention or treatment of several lifestyle related diseases; however, its measurement remains problematic.

Objective: The objective was to evaluate a portable armband device for measuring daily and physical activity EE compared with doubly labeled water (DLW) in free-living individuals.

Design: Daily EE and physical activity EE were measured in 45 subjects over a 10-d period simultaneously with 2 techniques: a portable armband and DLW. Resting metabolic rate was measured by indirect calorimetry, and the thermic effect of a meal was estimated (10% of daily EE). Physical activity EE was obtained by subtracting the values for resting metabolic rate and thermic effect of a meal measured with DLW from those measured with the armband. Body composition was measured with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Concordance between measures was evaluated by intraclass correlation, SEE, regression analysis, and Bland-Altman plots.

Results: Mean estimated daily EE measured with the armband was 117 kcal/d lower (2375 ± 366 kcal/d) than that measured with DLW (2492 ± 444 kcal/d; P < 0.01). Despite this group difference, individual comparisons between the armband and DLW were close, as evidenced by an intraclass correlation of 0.81 (P < 0.01).

Conclusions: The portable armband shows reasonable concordance with DLW for measuring daily EE in free-living adults. The armband may therefore be useful to estimate daily EE.

Publication: Am J Clin Nutr 2007;85:742–9.

 

 

 

Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2007 Jun;17(5):338-43. Epub 2006 Mar 20

 

A new device for measuring resting energy expenditure (REE) in healthy subjects

Malavolti M, Pietrobelli A, Dugoni M, Poli M, Romagnoli E, De Cristofaro P, Battistini NC

Abstract

Background and Aim: Lifestyle change targeted towards increasing daily resting energy expenditure (REE) is one of the cornerstones of obesity treatment. Measurements of energy expenditure and substrate utilization are essential to understanding the metabolic basis of obesity, and the physiological responses to perturbations in habitual food intake. REE is the largest part of human energy expenditure (60-70%) and an increase or decrease in REE would have a large impact on total energy. Accurate and easy-to-use methods for measuring REE are needed, to be applied by clinicians in daily clinical settings to assess the validity of a new instrument to estimate REE in normal weight, healthy adults.

Methods: Ninety-nine subjects (52 females and 47 males) (mean+/-SD, age 38+/-14 years; body mass index (BMI) 23+/-3 kg/m(2)) were tested. REE was assessed using a Sensor Medics Vmax metabolic cart with a ventilated canopy and with the SenseWear armband. Body composition, percentage fat mass (%FM) and percentage fat free mass (%FFM) were assessed by skinfold thickness measurements (SF), bio-electrical impedance analysis (BIA) and air displacement plethysmography (BOD-POD).

Results: No significant difference was found among measurements of FFM using the three different techniques. Both SenseWear and Sensor Medics Vmax showed a high correlation, r=0.42 and r=0.40 (p<0.0001) respectively, with BMI. No significant difference was found in mean REE between SenseWear (1540+/-280 kcal/day) and Sensor Medics Vmax (1700+/-330 kcal/day) (p=ns) and the correlation between REE measured by SenseWear and Sensor Medics Vmax was high (r=0.86, p<0.0001). Bland-Altman plot showed no difference in REE determination between SenseWear and Sensor Medics Vmax. %FFM determined by BOD-POD correlated with SenseWear (r=0.42, p<0.0001) as well as Sensor Medics Vmax (r=0.38, p<0.001).

Conclusion: SF, BIA and BOD-POD provide valid and reliable measurements of FFM. Our results suggest that the SenseWear armband is an acceptable device to accurately measure REE in healthy subjects. Its characteristics have the potential to reduce measurement times and make the SenseWear armband useful for epidemiological studies.

Publication: Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2007 Jun;17(5):338-43. Epub 2006 Mar 20