Meal replacement product-based diets are an effective weight loss intervention used in the management of obesity. Historically, these diets have been underutilised by HealthCare Professionals (HCPs). An online survey of mixed methods design was distributed to HCPs to capture current perceptions and prescribing patterns of meal replacement products (MRPs) in the management of overweight and obesity. A total of 303 HCPs working in weight management across Australia began the survey and 197 (65%) completed it. While over 70% of HCPs have prescribed MRP currently or in the past, MRPs are only prescribed to a median 7% of patients seeking weight management treatment. Qualitative analysis identified potential barriers to MRP prescription, which include experience with patient non-compliance, perceived poor long-term weight loss durability and safety concerns regarding the product and its use as a total meal replacement program. Safety concerns are centred on the perceived risk of weight cycling and its potential negative psychological impact. MRP prescription is 66% more likely to occur if HCPs had formal training in the use of MRPs relative to those who did not, with a relative risk (RR) of 1.7 (95% CI 1.4, 2.0). This study highlights the potential barriers to the prescription of MRPs, which are centred around safety concerns. This also indicates that formal training may enhance the likelihood of prescribing MRPs, suggesting that once HCPs have a comprehensive understanding of the products and the evidence behind their use, their prescription is likely to be increased.

Severely energy-restricted diets are used in obesity management, but their efficacy in people with class III obesity (body mass index ≥40 kg/m²) is uncertain. The aims of this systematic review and meta-analysis were to determine the effectiveness and characteristics of severely energy-restricted diets in people with class III obesity. As there was a lack of publications reporting long-term dietary interventions and randomised controlled trial designs, our original publication inclusion criteria were broadened to include uncontrolled study designs and a higher upper limit of energy intake. Eligible publications reported studies including adults with class III obesity and that assessed a diet with daily energy intake ≤5000 kJ for ≥4 weeks. Among 572 unique publications from 4 databases, 11 were eligible and 10 were suitable for meta-analysis. Our original intention was to classify comparison arms into short-term (1 year) interventions. Due to the lack of long-term data found, comparison arms were classified according to the commonalities in dietary intervention length among the included publications, namely dietary interventions of 4 weeks’ duration and those of ≥6 weeks’ duration. After a 4-week severely energy-restricted diet intervention, the pooled average weight loss was 9.81 (95% confidence interval 10.80, 8.83) kg, with a 95% prediction interval of 6.38 to 13.25 kg, representing a loss of approximately 4.1 to 8.6% of initial body weight. Diets ≥6 weeks’ duration produced 25.78 (29.42, 22.15) kg pooled average weight loss, with a 95% prediction interval of 13.77 to 37.80 kg, representing approximately 10.2 to 28.0% weight loss. Daily dietary prescriptions ranged from 330 to 5000 kJ (mean ± standard deviation 2260 ± 1400 kJ), and had wide variations in macronutrient composition. The diets were administered mostly via liquid meal replacement products. While the included publications had a moderate risk of bias score, which may inflate reported weight loss outcomes, the published data to date suggest that severely energy-restricted diets, delivered via diets of varying composition, effectively produce clinically relevant weight loss (≥10% of initial body weight) when used for 6 weeks or more in people with class III obesity.

Meal replacement Severely Energy-Restricted Diets (SERDs) produce ≥ 10% loss of body mass when followed for 6 weeks or longer in people with class III obesity (BMI ≥ 40 kg/m²). The efficacy of SERDs continues to be questioned by healthcare professionals, with concerns about poor dietary adherence. This study explored facilitators and barriers to dietary adherence and program attrition among people with class III obesity who had attempted or completed a SERD in a specialised weight loss clinic. Participants who commenced a SERD between January 2016 to May 2018 were invited to participate. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted from September to October 2018 with 20 participants (12 women and 8 men). Weight change and recounted events were validated using the participants’ medical records. Data were analysed by thematic analysis using line-by-line inductive coding. The mean age ± SD of participants was 51.2 ± 11.3 years, with mean ± SD BMI at baseline 63.7 ± 12.6 kg/m². Five themes emerged from participants’ recounts that were perceived to facilitate dietary adherence: (1.1) SERD program group counselling and psychoeducation sessions, (1.2) emotionally supportive clinical staff and social networks that accommodated and championed change in dietary behaviours, (1.3) awareness of eating behaviours and the relationship between these and progression of disease, (1.4) a resilient mindset, and (1.5) dietary simplicity, planning and self-monitoring. There were five themes on factors perceived to be barriers to adherence, namely: (2.1) product unpalatability, (2.2) unrealistic weight loss expectations, (2.3) poor program accessibility, (2.4) unforeseeable circumstances and (2.5) externalised weight-related stigma. This study highlights opportunities where SERD programs can be optimised to facilitate dietary adherence and reduce barriers, thus potentially improving weight loss outcomes with such programs. Prior to the commencement of a SERD program, healthcare professionals facilitating such programs could benefit from reviewing participants to identify common barriers. This includes identifying the presence of product palatability issues, unrealistic weight loss expectations, socio-economic disadvantage, and behaviour impacting experiences of externalised weight-related stigma.

Summary: Severe obesity affects 4% of Australians and is associated with increased use of healthcare services and higher healthcare costs. This study evaluates the effect of attending a public tertiary obesity service on acute hospital use. This record‐linkage study included people aged ≥16 years with severe obesity who attended the Nepean Blue Mountains Family Metabolic Health Service (FMHS), New South Wales, Australia between January 2017, and September 2021. Emergency department (ED) presentations and acute hospital admissions and respective costs in the 1‐year and 3‐years pre‐and‐post first FMHS attendance were compared, overall and for adequate attendance (≥5 visits). A total of 640 patients (74% female, 50% <45 years) attended the FMHS, totalling 15 303 occasions of service, average 24 per person. There was a 31.0% and 17.6% reduction in acute admissions and ED presentations, respectively, translating into 34.0% and 23.4% decrease in costs. Adequate engagement was associated with a 48% decreased risk of acute admission (odds ratio 0.52; 95% confidence interval 0.29–0.94). Over 3‐years, there was a 19.8% and 20.7% reduction in acute hospital admissions and ED presentations, respectively. Findings indicate that tertiary obesity services reduce acute hospital use. Improved access to specialized obesity management may offload hospitals and contribute to acute healthcare cost avoidance.

Severely energy-restricted diets (SERDs) are an effective treatment for obesity, however, adherence to such diets is often perceived as poor by healthcare professionals. This investigation evaluated adherence to a 12-week SERD in participants with class II and III obesity. Reported food consumption was compared against individualised SERD prescriptions. Body weight measures were obtained at baseline, 12 and 52 weeks. The data were analysed in three groups (i) the entire cohort (n = 26), (ii) completers (n = 13) and (iii) non-completers (n = 13). SERD prescription elements included (i) the number of meal replacement products; (ii) total protein; (iii) total energy intake; (iv) level of dietary energy restriction; (v) vegetable serves; (vi) water serves, and (vii) how much physical activity was performed. A generalised repeated-measures mixed-effects model was used to investigate if adherence to the program elements individually, or collectively, influenced weight loss. Completers had an average (± SD) of 4549 ± 748 kJ energy intake per day, resulting in a mean energy restriction of 62% compared to the 69% prescribed, indicating a degree of non-adherence. The percent weight changes for completers and non-completers were −7.8 ± 4.7% and −1.6 ± 2.6% at 12 weeks, and −12.2 ± 12.1% and −1.8 ± 3.2% at 52 weeks, respectively. Complete dietary adherence to a SERD may not be necessary to achieve a clinically relevant weight loss of 12% at 52 weeks, if energy is restricted by at least 62% (~4600 kJ per day) relative to requirements.

Summary: Lockdown measures due to coronavirus‐19 disease (COVID‐19) have impacted lifestyle factors. This study aimed to explore whether health and lifestyle behaviours changed during the 2020 COVID‐19 lockdown among patients with obesity. A specifically designed online survey and the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (DASS‐21) were administered to patients scheduled to attend a tertiary weight management service between 6 June–12 August 2020. A total of 210 participants completed the survey; mean age (SD) was 52.1 (12.5) years, 69% female and 67% Caucasian. Only 1.4% had tested positive to COVID‐19. There was a statistically significant increase in weight pre‐ and post‐COVID‐19 lockdown, with no sex differences. Most (61.3%) gained weight, 30.4% lost weight and 8.3% maintained. The majority changed their overall purchasing (88.4%) and eating behaviours (91.6%). Two‐thirds (64%) reported they did some form of exercise during the lockdown. Of those, exercise declined in 56.8% and increased in 18%. DASS‐21 scores were positively correlated to worry about COVID‐19, eating fewer core foods and eating more convenient/treat foods and negatively correlated with exercise. The results provide insights into how and why behaviour change occurs during stressful periods like the COVID‐19 pandemic. Although there was variability in individual weight trajectories, on average people with obesity gained weight and changed lifestyle behaviours during the COVID‐19 lockdown period. Strategies and support for people with obesity are required at these times.