Skip to main content

Addressing a critical need: A randomised controlled feasibility trial of acceptance and commitment therapy for bariatric surgery patients at 15–18 months post-surgery

APA Citation

Barley, E. A., Bovell, M., Bennett-Eastley, K., Lee, J. T., Lee-Baggley, D., Skene, S. S., Tai, M. Z., Brooks, S., & Scholtz, S. (2023). Addressing a critical need: A randomised controlled feasibility trial of acceptance and commitment therapy for bariatric surgery patients at 15–18 months post-surgery. PLoS ONE, 18(4), e0282849. doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282849

Publication Topic
ACT: Empirical
Publication Type
Article
RCT
Language
English
Keyword(s)
ACT, weight, bariatric, surgery
Abstract

Bariatric surgery is an effective treatment for obesity. However, around one in five people experience significant weight regain. Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) teaches acceptance of and defusion from thoughts and feelings which influence behaviour, and commitment to act in line with personal values. To test the feasibility and acceptability of ACT following bariatric surgery a randomised controlled trial of 10 sessions of group ACT or Usual Care Support Group control (SGC) was delivered 15–18 months post bariatric surgery (ISRCTN registry ID: ISRCTN52074801). Participants were compared at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months using validated questionnaires to assess weight, wellbeing, and healthcare use. A nested, semi-structured interview study was conducted to understand acceptability of the trial and group processes. 80 participants were consented and randomised. Attendance was low for both groups. Only 9 (29%) ACT participants completed > = half of the sessions, this was the case for 13 (35%) SGC participants. Forty-six (57.5%) did not attend the first session. At 12 months, outcome data were available from 19 of the 38 receiving SGC, and from 13 of the 42 receiving ACT. Full datasets were collected for those who remained in the trial. Nine participants from each arm were interviewed. The main barriers to group attendance were travel difficulties and scheduling. Poor initial attendance led to reduced motivation to return. Participants reported a motivation to help others as a reason to join the trial; lack of attendance by peers removed this opportunity and led to further drop out. Participants who attended the ACT groups reported a range of benefits including behaviour change. We conclude that the trial processes were feasible, but that the ACT intervention was not acceptable as delivered. Our data suggest changes to recruitment and intervention delivery that would address this.