ObjectiveTo determine the effect of a multidisciplinary lifestyle program in patients with RA with low–moderate disease activity.MethodsIn the ‘Plants for Joints’ (PFJ) parallel-arm, assessor-blind randomized controlled trial, patients with RA and 28-joint DAS (DAS28) ≥2.6 and ≤5.1 were randomized to the PFJ or control group. The PFJ group followed a 16-week lifestyle program based on a whole-food plant-based diet, physical activity and stress management. The control group received usual care. Medication was kept stable 3 months before and during the trial whenever possible. We hypothesized that PFJ would lower disease activity (DAS28). Secondary outcomes included anthropometric, metabolic and patient-reported measures. An intention-to-treat analysis with a linear mixed model adjusted for baseline values was used to analyse between-group differences.ResultsOf the 83 people randomized, 77 completed the study. Participants were 92% female with mean (S.D.) age of 55 (12) years, BMI of 26 (4) kg/m2 and mean DAS28 of 3.8 (0.7). After 16 weeks the PFJ group had a mean 0.9-point greater improvement of DAS28 vs the control group (95% CI 0.4, 1.3; P < 0.0001). The PFJ intervention led to greater decreases in body weight (difference –3.9 kg), fat mass (–2.8 kg), waist circumference (–3 cm), HbA1c (–1.3 mmol/mol) and low-density lipoprotein (–0.32 mmol/l), whereas patient-reported outcome measures, blood pressure, glucose and other lipids did not change.ConclusionThe 16-week PFJ multidisciplinary lifestyle program substantially decreased disease activity and improved metabolic status in people with RA with low–moderate disease activity.Trial RegistrationInternational Clinical Trials Registry Platform; https://www.who.int/clinical-trials-registry-platform; NL7800.
Objective: To compare the treatment effect on lifestyle-related risk factors (LRFs) in older (≥65 years) versus younger (<65 years) patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) in The Randomised Evaluation of Secondary Prevention by Outpatient Nurse SpEcialists 2 (RESPONSE-2) trial. Methods: The RESPONSE-2 trial was a community-based lifestyle intervention trial (n=824) comparing nurse-coordinated referral with a comprehensive set of three lifestyle interventions (physical activity, weight reduction and/or smoking cessation) to usual care. In the current analysis, our primary outcome was the proportion of patients with improvement at 12 months follow-up (n=711) in ≥1 LRF stratified by age. Results: At baseline, older patients (n=245, mean age 69.2±3.9 years) had more adverse cardiovascular risk profiles and comorbidities than younger patients (n=579, mean age 53.7±6.6 years). There was no significant variation on the treatment effect according to age (p value treatment by age=0.45, OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.22 to 2.31). However, older patients were more likely to achieve ≥5% weight loss (OR old 5.58, 95% CI 2.77 to 11.26 vs OR young 1.57, 95% CI 0.98 to 2.49, p=0.003) and younger patients were more likely to show non-improved LRFs (OR old 0.38, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.67 vs OR young 0.88, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.26, p=0.01). Conclusion: Despite more adverse cardiovascular risk profiles and comorbidities among older patients, nurse-coordinated referral to a community-based lifestyle intervention was at least as successful in improving LRFs in older as in younger patients. Higher age alone should not be a reason to withhold lifestyle interventions in patients with CAD.
Background: Marital status is associated with prognosis in patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD). However, the influence of partners on successful modification of lifestyle-related risk factors (LRFs) in secondary CVD prevention is unclear. Therefore, we studied the association between the presence of a partner, partner participation in lifestyle interventions and LRF modification in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods: In a secondary analysis of the RESPONSE-2 trial (n = 711), which compared nurse-coordinated referral to community-based lifestyle programs (smoking cessation, weight reduction and/or physical activity) to usual care in patients with CAD, we investigated the association between the presence of a partner and the level of partner participation on improvement in >1 LRF (urinary cotinine <200 ng/l, ≥5% weight reduction, ≥10% increased 6-min walking distance) without deterioration in other LRFs at 12 months follow-up. Results: The proportion of patients with a partner was 80% (571/711); 19% women (108/571). In the intervention group, 48% (141/293) had a participating partner in ≥1 lifestyle program. Overall, the presence of a partner was associated with patients' successful LRF modification (adjusted risk ratio (aRR) 1.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.40-2.51). A participating partner was associated with successful weight reduction (aRR 1.73, 95% CI 1.15-2.35). Conclusion: The presence of a partner is associated with LRF improvement in patients with CAD. Moreover, patients with partners participating in lifestyle programs are more successful in reducing weight. Involving partners of CAD patients in weight reduction interventions should be considered in routine practice.
It is essential to look for new forms of care, with an emphasis on Prevention, Relocation and Replacement (Health & Care Knowledge and Innovation Agenda 2020-2030). Especially when it comes to Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD). Globally, more than 5% of all illness and injury are attributable to AUD. Treatment is challenging; 47-75% of AUD patients who are clinically detoxified relapse within one year. Recovry aims to prevent an unhealthy lifestyle due to (alcohol) addiction by developing and testing a Virtual Reality (VR) self-prevention tool (relocating and replacing care treatment). Although research shows that VR is used successfully in health care and in the treatment of alcohol addiction, especially through the creation of presence, it has not been tested for effectiveness and implementation (as an adjuvant in a clinical post-detoxification phase of an AUD- therapy). The question of whether virtual-humans should be used in a VR treatment and whether 3600 recorded VR or computer generated (CG) VR should be selected before. The use of a virtual human in VR has expected advantages (more effect) but also disadvantages (more costs). The expected advantages and disadvantages of 360o VR (cheaper, faster, more personal) and CG VR (more flexible and interactive) also cause choice and implementation problems. Recovry is the first project in which a VR tool is (further) developed in which an AUD treatment can (and will) be tested for the effect and effectiveness of adding virtual humans in CG and 360o VR environments as part of preventive care for patients with an AUD. This project thus serves as a prelude to cooperation in the Netherlands around a more effective implementation of VR in the (self) care system and thus the active and independent integration of former AUD patients in society (“more people, less patients”).
