2397 - EFFECTIVENESS OF DYADIC PHYSICAL ACTIVITY PLANNING FOR WEIGHT LOSS: A LONGITUDINAL RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL

Session: D08S003 - Behavioural Change & Preventive Interventions 3
AUTHORS:
Palacz-Poborczyk Iga (SWPS University ~ Wroclaw ~ Poland) , Misiakowska Jowita (SWPS University ~ Wroclaw ~ Poland) , Banik Anna (SWPS University ~ Wroclaw ~ Poland) , Boberska Monika (SWPS University ~ Wroclaw ~ Poland) , Kulis-Stefanczyk Ewa (SWPS University ~ Wroclaw ~ Poland) , Kornafel Anna (SWPS University ~ Wroclaw ~ Poland) , Krzywicka Paulina (SWPS University ~ Wroclaw ~ Poland) , Kuzminska Julia (SWPS University ~ Wroclaw ~ Poland) , Paduszynska Natalia (SWPS University ~ Wroclaw ~ Poland) , Szczuka Zofia (SWPS University ~ Wroclaw ~ Poland) , Siwa Maria (SWPS University ~ Wroclaw ~ Poland) , Sorsa Gabriela (SWPS University ~ Wroclaw ~ Poland) , Wietrzykowska Dominika (SWPS University ~ Wroclaw ~ Poland) , Zaleskiewicz Hanna (SWPS University ~ Wroclaw ~ Poland) , Luszczynska Aleksandra (SWPS University ~ Wroclaw ~ Poland)
Abstract text:
Introduction: Dyadic physical activity planning is an effective strategy for reducing sedentary behaviour and promoting moderate-to-vigorous physical activity. Furthermore, while action planning-based interventions are frequently employed for weight management in overweight and obese populations, the existing evidence regarding their efficacy remains inconsistent.


Purpose: The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of dyadic physical activity planning across three distinct conditions (individual, collaborative, and dyadic) as a strategy contributing to weight loss among individuals with overweight or obesity.


Methods: 144 dyads (288 adult participants aged 18-90) with a target person with overweight or obesity person took part in a randomized controlled trial. Eligibility required the target persons to report predominantly sedentary lifestyle, failing to meet the WHO physical activity recommendations, and an intention to increase physical activity. The partner provided support for behavioural change. The control condition was compared with three intervention conditions: individual planning ("I-for-me"), collaborative planning ("We-for-us"), dyadic planning ("We-for-me"). Body weight of target person was measured at four time points: baseline (T0), 2-month (T1), 8-month (T3), and 14-month (T4) follow-up.


Results: Among the target persons significant overall effect of time on body weight (p=0.029) was identified. We also observed a statistically significant Time X Condition interaction, p=0.025, indicating differential effects of the intervention conditions. In particular, the target persons in the individual ("I-for-me") planning intervention condition achieved weight reduction across 14 months (2.81kg), whereas target persons in the control condition maintained their weight (0.16kg).


Conclusions: The strategy of individual planning ("I-for-me"), successfully bridged the intention-to-behaviour gap, resulting in a small but a relevant weight loss. These findings substantiate the need to incorporate structured social support and action planning components into future behavioural interventions targeting overweight and obesity.