Weight Loss Interventions for Adolescents With Intellectual Disabilities: An RCT.

OBJECTIVES

In this randomized trial, we compared the effectiveness of 2 diets (enhanced stop light diet [eSLD] versus conventional meal plan diet [CD]) and 2 delivery strategies (face-to-face [FTF] versus remote delivery [RD]) on weight loss across 6 months in adolescents with intellectual and developmental disabilities who were overweight or obese.

METHODS

Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 arms (FTF/CD, RD/CD, or RD/eSLD) and asked to attend one-on-one sessions with a health educator every 2 weeks to aid in maintaining compliance with recommendations for a reduced-energy diet and increased physical activity. The CD followed the US dietary guidelines. The eSLD used the stop light guide and was enhanced with portion-controlled meals. The FTF arm was delivered during in-person home visits. The RD arms were delivered by using video conferencing.

RESULTS

A total of 110 adolescents with intellectual and developmental disabilities (aged ∼16 years, 53% female, BMI 33) were randomly assigned to the FTF/CD ( = 36), RD/CD ( = 39), or RD/eSLD ( = 35) group. Body weight at 6 months was obtained from 97%, 100%, and 86% of participants in the FTF/CD, RD/CD, and RD/eSLD arms, respectively. The eSLD elicited significantly greater weight loss than the CD: RD/eSLD (-5.0 ± 5.9 kg; -6.4%) versus RD/CD (-1.8 ± 4.0 kg; -2.4%) ( = .01). However, weight loss did not differ by delivery strategy: FTF/CD (-0.3 ± 5.0 kg; -0.2%) versus RD/CD (-1.8 ± 4.0 kg; -2.4%) ( = .20).

CONCLUSIONS

The eSLD elicited significantly greater 6-month weight loss compared with a CD when both interventions were delivered remotely. Minimal 6-month weight loss, which did not differ significantly between FTF delivery and RD, was observed with a CD.

Copyright © 2021 by the American Academy of Pediatrics.