Is the Counterweight Program a feasible and acceptable option for structured weight management delivered by practice nurses in Australia? A mixed-methods study

4Citations
Citations of this article
42Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Nurse-led weight management programs, like the Counterweight Program in the United Kingdom, may offer a way for Australian general practices to provide weight management support to adults who are overweight or obese. During Counterweight, nurses provide patients with six fortnightly education sessions and three follow-up sessions to support weight maintenance. This study examined the feasibility, acceptability and perceived value of the Counterweight Program in the Australian primary care setting using a mixed-methods approach. Six practice nurses, from three general practices, were trained and subsidised to deliver the program. Of the 65 patients enrolled, 75% (n≤49) completed the six education sessions. General practitioners and practice nurses reported that the training and resource materials were useful, the program fitted into general practices with minimal disruption and the additional workload was manageable. Patients reported that the program created a sense of accountability and provided a safe space to learn about weight management. Overall, Counterweight was perceived as feasible, acceptable and valuable by Australian practice staff and patients. The key challenge for future implementation will be identifying adequate and sustainable funding. An application to publically fund Counterweight under the Medicare Benefits Schedule would require stronger evidence of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in Australia.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Gray, J., Hoon, E. A., Afzali, H. H. A., Spooner, C., Harris, M. F., & Karnon, J. (2017). Is the Counterweight Program a feasible and acceptable option for structured weight management delivered by practice nurses in Australia? A mixed-methods study. Australian Journal of Primary Health, 23(4), 348–363. https://doi.org/10.1071/PY16105

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free