Mobile-based intervention intended to stop obesity in preschool-aged children: the MINISTOP randomized controlled trial
Mobile-based intervention intended to stop obesity in preschool-aged children: the MINISTOP randomized controlled trial
复制标题
DOI：
10.3945/ajcn.116.150995
复制
发表时间：
2017-06-01
影响因子：
7.1
通讯作者：
Lof, Marie
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Nystrom, Christine Delisle;Sandin, Sven;Lof, Marie
背景：传统的肥胖预防项目耗时耗钱。移动电话技术在改变行为和控制体重方面取得了成功；然而，据我们所知，它在幼儿中的潜力还有待研究。目的：我们评估了移动健康（mHealth）肥胖预防项目对4.5岁健康瑞典儿童体脂、饮食习惯和身体活动的有效性。设计：从2014年到2015年，315名儿童被随机分配到干预组或对照组。干预组的父母接受了为期6个月的移动健康计划。主要指标是脂肪质量指数（FMI），而次要指标是水果、蔬菜、糖果和含糖饮料的摄入量，以及久坐和中高强度体育活动的时间。计算主要和次要结局的综合评分。结果：干预组与对照组对FMI的干预效果无统计学意义（平均+/- SD: -0.23 +/- 0.56与-0.20 +/- 0.49 kg/m(2)）。然而，干预组从基线到随访的平均综合评分均有所增加，而对照组则没有（+ 0.36 +/- 1.47单位与-0.06 +/- 1.33单位相比；P = 0.021）。这种改善在FMI高于中位数（4.11 kg/m(2)）的儿童中更为明显（P = 0.019）。干预组6项饮食与身体活动行为综合得分提高的几率比对照组高99% （P = 0.008）。结论：这项针对学龄前儿童的移动健康肥胖预防研究发现，干预组和对照组在FMI方面没有差异。然而，干预组的干预后综合评分（次要结果）明显高于对照组，特别是在FMI较高的儿童中。针对学龄前儿童特定肥胖类别的进一步研究是有必要的。
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/m(2)). 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/m(2)) (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.