|Salinardi, Taylor - Tufts University|
|Batra, Payal - Tufts University|
|Das, Sai Krupa - Jean Mayer Human Nutrition Research Center On Aging At Tufts University|
|Robinson, Lisa - Jean Mayer Human Nutrition Research Center On Aging At Tufts University|
|Lichtenstein, Alice - Jean Mayer Human Nutrition Research Center On Aging At Tufts University|
|Deckersbach, Thilo - Massachusetts General Hospital|
|Roberts, Susan - Jean Mayer Human Nutrition Research Center On Aging At Tufts University|
Submitted to: FASEB Letters
Publication Type: Abstract Only
Publication Acceptance Date: 2/13/2012
Publication Date: 3/29/2012
Citation: Salinardi, T., Batra, P., Das, S., Robinson, L., Lichtenstein, A., Deckersbach, T., Roberts, S. 2012. A worksite-based weight loss intervention for obesity prevention [abstract]. FASEB Letters. 26:257.1.
Technical Abstract: Worksites are increasingly being used as locations for implementing healthy diet and weight loss interventions. Hence, there is an urgent need to identify programs that are both successful and sustainable. We conducted a 6-month pilot randomized controlled trial in overweight and obese employees at 4 worksites (2 intervention; 2 delayed intervention sites) to examine the effects of a worksite-based intervention on weight loss and changes in cardiovascular risk factors. The intervention combined recommendations to consume a high fiber, low glycemic load diet with education on nutrition and behavior change. Fasting body weight, cholesterol, glucose, and blood pressure were measured at baseline and 6 months in 118 subjects. Results were analyzed using an ANCOVA model with baseline values as covariates. Participants at the intervention sites (n=82) lost significantly more weight (-8.0 +/-6.7 vs. +0.6 +/- 2.8 kg, p<0.0001) and had greater decreases in fasting total cholesterol (-13.2 +/- 25.0 vs. -2.4 +/- 24.2 mg/dl, p=0.0423), fasting glucose (-6.4 +/- 13.2 vs. +5.7 +/- 18.0 mg/dl, p=0.0006), systolic blood pressure (-8.6 +/- 12.6 vs. +5.5 +/- 10.8 mmHg, p<0.0001), and diastolic blood pressure (-8.2 +/-10.9 vs. -0.5 +/- 6.7 mmHg, p=0.0007) as compared to participants at control sites (n=33). This worksite intervention resulted in significant weight loss and improvements in cardiovascular risk factors relative to no intervention.