Advertisement

Effectiveness of Policies and Programs to Combat Adult Obesity: a Systematic Review

  • Eva Tseng
  • Allen Zhang
  • Oluwaseun Shogbesan
  • Kimberly A. Gudzune
  • Renee F. Wilson
  • Hadi Kharrazi
  • Lawrence J. Cheskin
  • Eric B. Bass
  • Wendy L. Bennett
Review Paper

Abstract

Background

This systematic review identifies programs, policies, and built-environment changes targeting prevention and control of adult obesity and evaluates their effectiveness.

Methods

We searched PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and EconLit from January 2000 to March 2018. We included natural experiment studies evaluating a program, policy, or built-environment change targeting adult obesity and reporting weight/body mass index (BMI). Studies were categorized by primary intervention target: physical activity/built environment, food/beverage, messaging, or multiple. Two reviewers independently assessed the risk of bias for each study using the Effective Public Health Practice Project tool.

Results

Of 158 natural experiments targeting obesity, 17 reported adult weight/BMI outcomes. Four of 9 studies reporting on physical activity/built environment demonstrated reduced weight/BMI, although effect sizes were small with low strength of evidence and high risk of bias. None of the 5 studies targeting the food/beverage environment decreased weight/BMI; strength of evidence was low, and 2 studies were rated high risk of bias.

Discussion

We identified few natural experiments reporting on the effectiveness of programs, policies, and built-environment changes on adult obesity. Overall, we found no evidence that policies intending to promote physical activity and healthy eating had beneficial effects on weight/BMI and most studies had a high risk of bias. Limitations include few studies met our inclusion criteria; excluded studies in children and those not reporting on weight/BMI outcomes; weight/BMI reporting was very heterogeneous. More high-quality research, including natural experiments studies, is critical for informing the population-level effectiveness of obesity prevention and control initiatives in adults.

KEY WORDS

obesity prevention systematic reviews 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Dr. Elizabeth Stuart and Ms. Emily Knapp for their input. They also thank Dr. Lionel Bañez, their task order officer at AHRQ.

Prior Presentation

This work was presented as a poster at the Society for General Internal Medicine Meeting, April 12, 2018.

Funding Information

This report is based on research conducted by the Johns Hopkins University Evidence-based Practice Center under contract 290-2012-00007I to AHRQ, Rockville, Maryland.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

Dr. Lawrence Cheskin served on the scientific advisory board of Medifast during the conduct of the study. All other authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Disclaimer

The findings and conclusions in this document are those of the authors, who are responsible for its contents; the findings and conclusions do not necessarily represent the views of AHRQ. Therefore, no statement in this report should be construed as an official position of AHRQ or of the US Department of Health and Human Services.

Reproducible Research Statement: Study protocol: Available at www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?ID=CRD42017055750. Statistical code: Not applicable. Data set: Full technical report available at https://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/topics/obesity-research-methods/systematic-review

Funding Source: National Institutes of Health Office of Disease Prevention and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. PROSPERO registry #CRD42017055750.

References

  1. 1.
    World Health Organization. Global Status Report on Noncommunicable Diseases 2014. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2014.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kopelman P, Jebb S, Butland B. Executive summary: Foresight ‘Tackling Obesities: Future Choices’ project. Obes Rev. 2007;8:Suppl 1: vi-ix.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jensen MD, Ryan DH, Apovian CM, et al. 2013 AHA/ACC/TOS guideline for the management of overweight and obesity in adults: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and The Obesity Society. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63(25 Pt B):2985-3023.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Swinburn BA, Sacks G, Hall et al. The global obesity pandemic: shaped by global drivers and local environments. Lancet. 2011;378(9793):804–14.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Craig P, Cooper C, Gunnell D, et al. Using natural experiments to evaluate population health interventions: new Medical Research Council guidance. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2012;66(12):1182–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wood E, Lloyd-Smith E, Li K, et al. Frequent needle exchange use and HIV incidence in Vancouver, Canada, Am J Med. 2007;120(2):172–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ciaccio CE, Gurley-Calvez, Shireman TI. Indoor tobacco legislation is associated with fewer emergency department visits for asthma exacerbation in children. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2016;117(6):641–645.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Frieden T, Bassett M, Thorpe L, Farley T. Public health in New York City, 2002-2007: confronting epidemics of the modern era. Int J Epidemiol. 2008;37(5):966–77.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bodker M, Pisinger C, Toft U, Jorgensen T. The rise and fall of the world's first fat tax. Health Policy. 2015;119(6):737–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Smed S, Scarborough P, Rayner M, Jensen J. The effects of the Danish saturated fat tax on food and nutrient intake and modelled health outcomes: an econometric and comparative risk assessment evaluation. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2016;70(6):681–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Taber D, Chriqui J, Powell L, Chaloupka F. Banning all sugar-sweetened beverages in middle schools: reduction of in-school access and purchasing but not overall consumption. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2012;166(3):256–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dubowitz T, Ghosh-Dastidar M, Cohen DA, et al. Diet and perceptions change with supermarket introduction in a food desert, but not because of supermarket use. Health Aff (Millwood). 2015;34:1858–68.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cummins S, Flint E, Matthews SA. New neighborhood grocery store increased awareness of food access but did not alter dietary habits or obesity. Health Aff (Millwood). 2014;33:283–91.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Elbel B, Mijanovich T, Kiszko K, Abrams C, Cantor J, Dixon LB. The introduction of a supermarket via tax-credits in a low-income area. Am J Health Promot. 2017;31(1):50–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Brown BB, Werner CM, Tribby CP, Miller HJ, Smith KR. Transit use, physical activity, and body mass index changes: objective measures associated with complete street light-rail construction. Am J Public Health. 2015;105:1468–74.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    MacDonald JM, Stokes RJ, Cohen DA, Kofner A, Ridgeway GK. The effect of light rail transit on body mass index and physical activity. Am J Prev Med. 2010;39:105–12.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Panter J, Heinen E, Mackett R, Ogilvie D. Impact of new transport infrastructure on walking, cycling, and physical activity. Am J Prev Med. 2016;50(2):e45–53.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bennett WL, Cheskin LJ, Wilson RF, et al. Methods for Evaluating Natural Experiments in Obesity: Systematic Evidence Review. Comparative Effectiveness Review no. 204. (Prepared by the Johns Hopkins University Evidence-based Practice Center under contract no. 290–2012-00007-I.) AHRQ publication no. 18-EHC006-EF. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2017.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bennett WL WR, Zhang A, Tseng E, et al. Methods for evaluating natural experiments in obesity: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2018 1: 1–10.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    McGuire S. Institute of Medicine. 2012. Accelerating progress in obesity prevention: solving the weight of the nation. Washington, DC: the National Academies Press. Adv Nutr. 2012;3(5):708–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Berkman ND, Lohr KN, Ansari M, et al. Grading the Strength of a Body of Evidence When Assessing Health Care Interventions for the Effective Health Care Program of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality: An Update. Methods Guide for Effectiveness and Comparative Effectiveness Reviews [Internet]. 2013.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hu Y, van Lenthe FJ, Judge K, et al. Did the English strategy reduce inequalities in health? A difference-in-difference analysis comparing England with three other European countries BMC Public Health. 2016;16:865.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bolton KA, Kremer P, Gibbs L, Waters E, Swinburn B, de Silva A. The outcomes of health-promoting communities: being active eating well initiative-a community-based obesity prevention intervention in Victoria, Australia. Int J Obes (Lond). 2017;41(7):1080–1090.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Cleland V, Dwyer T, Blizzard L, Venn A. The provision of compulsory school physical activity: associations with physical activity, fitness and overweight in childhood and twenty years later. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2008;5:14.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Webb E, Netuveli G, Millett C. Free bus passes, use of public transport and obesity among older people in England. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2012;66:176–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Webb E, Laverty A, Mindell J, Millett C. Free bus travel and physical activity, gait speed, and adiposity in the english longitudinal study of ageing. Am J Public Health. 2016;106:136–42.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Camacho-Rivera M, Rosenbaum E, Yama C, Chambers E. Low-income housing rental assistance, perceptions of neighborhood food environment, and dietary patterns among latino adults: the AHOME Study. J Racial Ethn Health Disparities. 2017;4:346–53.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sadler RC, Gilliland JA, Arku G. A food retail-based intervention on food security and consumption. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2013;10:3325–46.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sturm R, Hattori A. Diet and obesity in Los Angeles County 2007-2012: is there a measurable effect of the 2008 “fast-food ban”? Soc Sci Med. 2015;133:205–11.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Restrepo BJ. Calorie labeling in chain restaurants and body weight: evidence from New York. Health Econ. 2017;26(10):1191–209.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Bekemeier B, Pui-Yan Yip M, Flaxman AD, Barrington W. Five community-wide approaches to physical activity promotion: a cluster analysis of these activities in local health jurisdictions in 6 states. J Public Health Manag Pract. 2018;24(2):112–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Chen C, Chou S-Y, Thornton RJ. The effect of household technology on weight and health outcomes among chinese adults: evidence from China’s ‘home appliances going to the countryside’ policy. J Hum Cap. 2015;9:364–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Brown AL, Khattak AJ, Rodriguez DA. Neighbourhood types, travel and body mass: a study of new urbanist and suburban neighbourhoods in the US. Urban Stud. 2008;45:963–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Rigdon J, Berkowitz SA, Seligman HK, Basu S. Re-evaluating associations between the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program participation and body mass index in the context of unmeasured confounders. Soc Sci Med. 2017;192:112–24.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Durand CP, Oluyomi AO, Gabriel KP, et al. The effect of light rail transit on physical activity: design and methods of the travel-related activity in neighborhoods study. Front Public Health. 2016;4:103.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Taksler GB, Kisko K, Abrams C, Elbel B. Adults who order sugar-sweetened beverages: sociodemographics and meal patterns at fast food chains. Am J Prev Med. 2016;51(6):890–897.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Huang TT, Wyka KE, Ferris EB, et al. The Physical Activity and Redesigned Community Spaces (PARCS) Study: Protocol of a natural experiment to investigate the impact of citywide park redesign and renovation. BMC Public Health. 2016;16(1):1160.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Mayne SL, Auchincloss AH, Michael YL. Impact of policy and built environment changes on obesity-related outcomes: a systematic review of naturally occurring experiments. Obes Rev. 2015;16(5):362–75.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Sisnowski J, Street JMA-Ohoo, Merlin T. Improving food environments and tackling obesity: A realist systematic review of the policy success of regulatory interventions targeting population nutrition. PLoS One. 2017;12(8):e0182581.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    McCormack GR, Shiell A. In search of causality: a systematic review of the relationship between the built environment and physical activity among adults. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2011;8:125.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of General Internal Medicine 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eva Tseng
    • 1
    • 2
  • Allen Zhang
    • 3
    • 4
  • Oluwaseun Shogbesan
    • 5
  • Kimberly A. Gudzune
    • 1
    • 2
  • Renee F. Wilson
    • 3
    • 4
  • Hadi Kharrazi
    • 3
  • Lawrence J. Cheskin
    • 6
  • Eric B. Bass
    • 1
    • 3
    • 4
  • Wendy L. Bennett
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Division of General Internal MedicineJohns Hopkins University School of MedicineBaltimoreUSA
  2. 2.Welch Center for Prevention, Epidemiology, & Clinical ResearchThe Johns Hopkins UniversityBaltimoreUSA
  3. 3.Department of Health Policy and ManagementJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public HealthBaltimoreUSA
  4. 4.Johns Hopkins University Evidence-based Practice Center, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public HealthThe Johns Hopkins UniversityBaltimoreUSA
  5. 5.Department of Medicine, Reading HospitalWest ReadingUSA
  6. 6.Department of Health, Behavior & SocietyJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public HealthBaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations