Technology alone resulted in worse weight loss compared to tech and a telehealth coach.
Share
There is now an abundance of options available for those seeking to achieve their fittest and healthiest versions of themselves. Technology offers various products for tracking calories and monitoring gym sessions.
But, is a wireless system that provides daily feedback on progress in lifestyle change and weight loss just as effective as the same system combined with human coaching for people with obesity trying to lose weight?
A recent Northwestern Medicine study suggests that technology alone cannot replace the impact of human support in achieving significant weight loss in the treatment of obesity.
“Giving people technology alone for the initial phase of obesity treatment produces unacceptably worse weight loss than giving them treatment that combines technology with a human coach,” said corresponding study author Bonnie Spring, director of the Center for Behavior and Health and professor of preventive medicine at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine.
In a recent SMART study, it was found that individuals who initially only received technology without coach support were less likely to achieve a significant weight loss of at least 5% of their body weight compared to those who had a human coach from the beginning.
The SMART Weight Loss Management study was a randomized controlled trial that compared two innovative treatment approaches for adult obesity. Stepped care, which optimizes treatment resources, was at the heart of the study. Participants either began their weight loss journey with the use of advanced technology alone or with a comprehensive approach involving both technology and personalized coaching.
The study utilized a Wireless Feedback System, which included an integrated app, Wi-Fi scale, and Fitbit. This system empowered participants to track their diet, activity, and weight while receiving valuable feedback.
A study was conducted on 400 adults aged 18-60 with obesity. They were randomly assigned to undergo three months of stepped-care behavioral obesity treatment, starting with either the Wireless Feedback System (WFS) alone or the WFS along with telehealth coaching. Weight loss was measured after two, four, and eight weeks of treatment, and treatment was intensified if weight loss was less than 0.5 pounds per week.
Both groups began with the WFS tracking technology, with the standard-of-care group also transmitting digital data to a coach for behavioral coaching via telehealth. Participants showing suboptimal weight loss were re-randomized to receive either modest (supportive messaging) or vigorous (messaging plus a traditional weight loss treatment component) treatment intensification.
Research has shown that while humans engage with wearable tech, there’s uncertainty about whether just using the devices translates to actual exercise or following dietary advice. This gap between engagement and meaningful output might explain why technology is not yet a complete replacement for human support in weight loss and muscle gain. Being accountable to an actual person may motivate us to do more.
“At this stage, the average person still needs a human coach to achieve clinically meaningful weight loss goals because the tech isn’t sufficiently developed yet,” Spring said. “We may not be so far away from having an AI chatbot that can sub for a human, but we are not quite there yet. It’s within reach. The tech is developing really fast.”
It is possible that in the future, more advanced technology might be able to replace human coaches, but the current findings highlight the importance of human support in achieving meaningful weight loss.
Journal reference:
See stories of the future in your inbox each morning.
© 2024 All Rights Reserved, Tech Explorist™
