Adherence is a multi-dimensional construct in the POUNDS LOST trial
Research on the conceptualization of adherence to treatment has not addressed a key question: Is adherence best defined as being a uni-dimensional or multi-dimensional behavioral construct? The primary aim of this study was to test which of these conceptual models best described adherence to a weight management program. This ancillary study was conducted as a part of the POUNDS LOST trial that tested the efficacy of four dietary macronutrient compositions for promoting weight loss. A sample of 811 overweight/obese adults was recruited across two clinical sites, and each participant was randomly assigned to one of four macronutrient prescriptions: (1) Low fat (20% of energy), average protein (15% of energy); (2) High fat (40%), average protein (15%); (3) Low fat (20%), high protein (25%); (4) High fat (40%), high protein (25%). Throughout the first 6 months of the study, a computer tracking system collected data on eight indicators of adherence. Computer tracking data from the initial 6 months of the intervention were analyzed using exploratory and confirmatory analyses. Two factors (accounting for 66% of the variance) were identified and confirmed: (1) behavioral adherence and (2) dietary adherence. Behavioral adherence did not differ across the four interventions, but prescription of a high fat diet (vs. a low fat diet) was found to be associated with higher levels of dietary adherence. The findings of this study indicated that adherence to a weight management program was best conceptualized as being multi-dimensional, with two dimensions: behavioral and dietary adherence.
KeywordsAdherence Overweight Obesity Randomized controlled trial Lifestyle behavior modification
- Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
- Evans, I. M. (1986). Response structure and the triple-response-mode concept. In R. O. Nelson & S. C. Hayes (Eds.), Conceptual foundations of behavioral assessment (pp. 131–155). New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Haynes, R. B., McDonald, H., Garg, A. X., & Montague, P. (2002). Interventions for helping patients to follow prescriptions for medications. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2). doi:10.1002/14651858.CD000011.
- Levensky, E. R., & O’Donohue, W. T. (2006). Patient adherence and nonadherence to treatments. In W. T. O’Donohue & E. R. Levensky (Eds.), Promoting treatment adherence: A practical handbook for health care providers (pp. 1–14). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.Google Scholar
- Leventhal, H. (1993). Theories of compliance, and turning necessities into preferences: Application to adolescent health action. In N. A. Krasnegor, L. H. Epstein, S. B. Johnson, & S. J. Yaffe (Eds.), Developmental aspects of health compliance behavior (pp. 91–124). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.Google Scholar
- Nelson, R. O., & Hayes, S. C. (1986). Conceptual foundations of behavioral assessment. New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.Google Scholar
- Riekert, K. A. (2006). Integrating regimen adherence assessment into clinical practice. In W. T. O’Donohue & E. R. Levensky (Eds.), Promoting treatment adherence (pp. 17–34). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
- U.S. Department of Agriculture. (1994–1996). Agricultural Research Service. Beltsville Human Nutrition Research Center, Food Surveys Research Group (Beltsville, MD). Continuing survey of food intakes by individuals.Google Scholar