Defining the appropriate setting for treating obese patients: do we have the right tools?

Luisella Vigna1, Amelia Brunani2, Gianna Maria Agnelli1, Maria Rosaria Ingenito1, Silvia Tomaino3, Dario Consonni4, Paolo Capodaglio2, Lorenzo Maria Donini5
1Occupational Health Unit, Clinica del Lavoro “L. Devoto”, Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy
2Division of Rehabilitation Medicine, IRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano, San Giuseppe Hospital, Verbania, Italy
3Department of Neuropsychology, Padua University, Padua, Italy
4Epidemiology Unit, Clinica del Lavoro “L. Devoto”, Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico Milan, Milan, Italy
5Section of Medical Pathophysiology, Food Science and Endocrinology, Department of Experimental Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome , Rome, Italy .

Tóm tắt

To allocate obese patients to the correct therapeutic setting, the Italian Obesity Society (SIO) has suggested a new algorithm based on the Edmonton obesity staging system (EOSS). The aim of our study was to apply in two retrospective cohorts of obese patients both the EOSS and the activities of daily life (ADL) scale to identify also their rehabilitation needs. 288 out-patients and 298 in-patients were recruited. All patients were evaluated with a multidisciplinary approach and the mental, mechanical, and metabolic comorbidities were scored. The 2 groups differed for gender (28.8% men in out-patients, p = 0.001), age (> 60 years in in-patients, p = 0.03), BMI (40.8 ± 6.3 kg/m2 in in-patients, p < 0.001), and ADL (44.0 ± 16.0 in in-patients, p < 0.001). EOSS distribution was significant different: stages 0 and 1 were more present in out-patients and stages 3 and 4 in in-patients. In both groups, BMI increased significantly in EOSS category [95% CI + 1.4 (+ 0.5; + 2.2) for out-patients and + 1.7 (+ 0.7; + 2.6) for in-patients] and ADL were positively correlated with EOSS [95% CI + 5.0 (+ 2.5; + 7.4) for out-patients and + 9.9 (+ 7.7; + 12.2) for in-patients]. Mean ADL difference between the two groups, adjusted for age (over/under 60 years), BMI category, and EOSS was 24.8 (p < 0.0001). SIO algorithm seems an effective tool for staging obesity in relation to the clinical impairment. To better define the correct rehabilitative allocation of obese patients, we suggest to integrate the SIO algorithm with the ADL score. Level III, retrospective case-control analytic study.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Yumuk V, Tsigos C, Fried M, Schindler K, Busetto L, Micic D, Toplak H, for the Obesity Management Task Force of the European Association for the Study of Obesity (2015) European guidelines for obesity management in adults. Obes Facts 8(6):402–424. https://doi.org/10.1159/000442721 Standard Italiani per la cura dell’obesità—SIO-ADI 2016–2017 Sharma AM, Kushner RF (2009) A proposed clinical staging system for obesity. Int J Obes 33(3):289–295. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-789X.2009.00614.x Canning KL, Brown RE, Wharton S, Sharma AM, Kuk JL (2015) Edmonton obesity staging system prevalence and association with weight loss in a publicly funded referral-based obesity clinic. J Obes 2015:619734. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/619734 Donini LM, Cuzzolaro M, Spera G, Badiali M, Basso N, Bollea MR, Bosello O, Brunani A, Busetto L, Cairella G, Cannella C, Capodaglio P, Carbonelli MG, Castellaneta E, Castra R, Clini E, Contaldo F, Dalla Ragione L, Dalle Grave R, D’Andrea F, Del Balzo V, De Cristofaro P, Di Flaviano E, Fassino S, Ferro AM, Forestieri P, Franzoni E, Gentile MG, Giustini A, Jacoangeli F, Lubrano C, Lucchin L, Manara F, Marangi G, Marcelli M, Marchesini G, Marri G, Marrocco W, Melchionda N, Mezzani B, Migliaccio P, Muratori F, Nizzoli U, Ostuzzi R, Panzolato G, Pasanisi F, Persichetti P, Petroni ML, Pontieri V, Prosperi E, Renna C, Rovera G, Santini F, Saraceni V, Savina C, Scuderi N, Silecchia G, Strollo F, Todisco P, Tubili C, Ugolini G, Zamboni M (2010) Obesity and eating disorders. indications for the different levels of care. An Italian expert consensus document. Eat Weight Disord 15(1–2 Suppl):1–31 Bosello O, Donataccio MP, Cuzzolaro M (2016) Obesity or obesities? Controversies on the association between body mass index and premature mortality. Eat Weight Disord 21(2):165–174. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40519-016-0278-4 Sharma AM (2010) M, M, M and M: a mnemonic for assessing obesity. Obes Rev 11:808–809. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-789X.2010.00766.x Donini LM, Brunani A, Sirtori A, Savina C, Tempera S, Cuzzolaro M, Spera G, Cimolin V, Precilios H, Raggi A, Capodaglio P, the SIO-SISDCA TASK FORCE (2011) Assessing disability in morbidly obese individuals: the Italian Society of Obesity test for obesity-related disabilities. Disabil Rehabil 33(25–26):2509–2518. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2011.575529 Sirtori A, Brunani A, Capodaglio P, Berselli ME, Villa V, Ceriani F, Corti S, Leonardi M, Raggi A, ICF-OBESITY Group (2016) Patients with obesity-related comorbidities have higher disability compared with those without obesity-related comorbidities: results from a cross-sectional study. Int J Rehabil Res 39(1):63–69. https://doi.org/10.1097/MRR.0000000000000146 Vigna LM, Brunani A, Gori F, Mussino F, Tomaino SCM, Agnelli GM, Consonni D, Riboldi L (2018) Edmonton obesity staging system (EOSS) and work ability in the evaluation of workers affected by obesity: a preliminary report. J Occup Environ Med 60(8):732–736. https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0000000000001321 Chiappetta S, Stier C, Squillante S, Theodoridou S, Weiner RA (2016) The importance of the edmonton obesity staging system in predicting postoperative outcome and 30-day mortality after metabolic surgery. Surg Obes Relat Dis 12(10):1847–1855. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soard.2016.02.042