The perspective of people living with obesity on self-management interventions: a mixed-method overview for the COMPAR-EU project

Session: 

Oral session: Overviews, rapid reviews, and other types of evidence synthesis (4)

Date: 

Thursday 24 October 2019 - 11:00 to 12:30

Location: 

All authors in correct order:

Salas Gama K1, Viteri-García A2, Martínez García L3, Montesinos-Guevara C2, Pérez-Bracchiglione J4, Alonso-Coello P3, Niño de Guzman E3
1 Santa Creu i Sant Pau Hospital, Spain
2 Cochrane Ecuador, Centro de Investigación en Salud Pública y Epidemiología Clínica (CISPEC), Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud Eugenio Espejo, Universidad UTE, Ecuador
3 Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre, Spain
4 Interdisciplinary Centre for Health Studies (CIESAL), Universidad de Valparaíso, Chile
Presenting author and contact person

Presenting author:

Ena Pery Niño de Guzman

Contact person:

Abstract text
Background: self-management interventions (SMIs) are complex interventions that are critical to achieving high-quality care for people living with chronic conditions, like obesity. The perspectives of people living with obesity are essential for the successful implementation of SMIs.

Objectives: we aim to identify, appraise and analyse currently available evidence addressing the perspective of people living with obesity on SMIs. Specifically, we aim to:
1) explore how people with obesity value the importance of outcomes of SMIs; and
2) identify contextual factors that impact acceptability and feasibility features from the perspective of people with obesity.
This is one of four mixed-method overviews of the COMPAREU-Project, a European Project that aims to identify and rank the most cost-effective SMIs for four chronic conditions.

Methods: we searched systematically for quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods systematic reviews (SRs) through MEDLINE, CINAHL and PsycINFO up to November 2018. Two reviewers independently screened references for inclusion and sought additional records using forward citation of selected studies in Scopus, handsearching references of previous overviews, and PubMed automatic search updates in MEDLINE up to March 2019. In pairs, we appraised the quality of reviews using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist and estimated the overall primary studies overlap. We used a convergent parallel synthesis approach with narrative and thematic synthesis of findings.

Results: we identified over 2200 references and included 20 SRs. The SRs were published from 2008 to 2018. More than half of the studies were conducted in the UK (12/20, 60%). Most SRs were quantitative SRs (9/20, 45%) and qualitative evidence synthesis (QES) (7/20, 35%). Only 20% (4/20) were mixed-method synthesis (MMS). The more frequent methods used in QES were thematic synthesis (7/20, 35%) and meta-ethnography (4/20, 20%). Half of the MMS adopted a convergent segregative approach. In 60% of the studies the quality of reviews was considered high (12/20 obtained 80% or more). The overlap of primary studies was less than 25%. The results of the synthesis will be presented at the Colloquium.

Conclusions: we will present an overview of quantitative and qualitative evidence of the perspective of people with obesity on SMIs. These results will inform the SR agenda in the SMIs field and will be incorporated in the development of recommendations in the COMPAR-EU Project.

Patient or healthcare consumer involvement: this overview reflects the perspective of people living with obesity reflecting the body of evidence available in SRs. In addition, we will include feedback from COMPAR-EU Consortium members who represent other relevant stakeholders.