1. WHO HELPS OVERWEIGHT PATIENTS THE MOST? TECHNOLOGY IS THE ANSWER! Kimberly Warner Director of Global Professional Sales BodyMedia, Inc. Disclosures: Employed by BodyMedia, Inc. © Copyright 2012 1

2. 2 The Comparison of a Technology-based System and In-Person Behavioral Weight Loss Intervention in Overweight and Obese Adults Study Lead: Dr. John Jakicic, PhD University of Pittsburgh Physical Activity and Weight Management Research Center Weight Loss Outcome Study 1:

3. 3 Study design consisted of three groups Independently funded NIH study 6 month intervention Randomized into 1 of 3 groups: 1.Group Lifestyle Intervention  Weekly group meetings  Self-monitoring with pencil and paper for food diaries  Energy intake goals of 1200-1800 kcal/day, reduce fat intake to 20-30% of total energy intake  Exercise increased from 100 to 300 minutes/week 2.BodyMedia Alone (armband + display + website) with phone calls  Brief (< 10min) telephone call 1x per month  Weekly lessons mailed corresponding to group meetings  Self-monitoring with BodyMedia system  Energy intake goals of 1200-1800 kcal/day, reduce fat intake to 20-30% of total energy intake  Exercise increased from 100 to 300 minutes/week 3.Group Lifestyle Intervention + BodyMedia  Combination of technology + group meetings

4. 4 Study Design Group Lifestyle Intervention Armband Alone Group Lifestyle Intervention + Armband +

5. 6 month results show adding BodyMedia FIT alone with phone calls or with Group Weight Loss meetings produced greater weight loss. > 2X Weight Loss when adding Armband to Weight Loss Program 5 + $$$ Pellegrini CA, Verba SD, Otto AD, Helsel DL, Davis KK, Jakicic JM. The Comparison of a Technology-Based System and an In-Person Weight Loss Intervention. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2011 Feb 10.

6. Weight loss of 5 -10% of body weight will lower risks for weight-related diseases such as high BP, type 2 diabetes, and heart disease. 1 1 “Facts About Healthy Weight” http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/prof/heart/obesity/aim_kit/healthy_wt_facts.htm 6 +

7. Group Lifestyle Intervention + Armband group had 100% retention throughout the 6 month study. 7 +

8. 8 Electronic feedback in a diet and physical activity-based lifestyle intervention for weight loss: a randomized controlled trial Study Lead: Dr. Steven N. Blair, PhD University of South Carolina Department of Exercise Science, Arnold School of Public Health Weight Loss Outcome Study 2:

9. 9 Changing behavior through the LEAN study A lifestyle intervention study designed to examine the effectiveness of the BodyMedia system as a tool for weight loss Lifestyle Education for Activity & Nutrition for a Leaner You: 2008-2009 (LEAN) Study Study Population (N=197) Men and women 18-65 years old Overweight or obese Access to a computer and the internet Currently not in an exercise program Currently not in a formal weight loss program Lifestyle Intervention over 9 months 197 total participants in 4 groups Randomized study Baseline, 4 month, and 9 month assessments

10. Methods:Methods: 10 1. Standard Care (control) 2. Armband Alone 3. Weight Loss Program 4. Weight Loss Program + Armband Group meetings for 4 months, then phone calls for 5 months.

11. 11 Results equal more than 3x weight loss 9 month results with BodyMedia Armband alone and BodyMedia + group weight loss program Shuger SL, Barry VW, Sui X, McClain A, Hand GA, Wilcox S, Meriwether RA, Hardin JW, Blair SN. Electronic feedback in a diet and physical activity-based lifestyle intervention for weight loss: a randomized controlled trial. Int J Behav Nutri Phys. 2011. May 18;8:41.

12. 12 Group Weight Loss + Armband group had significant reductions in waist circumference at both 4 and 9 months.

13. Very Low Density Lipoproteins (VLDL) decreased significantly from baseline for Group Weight Loss + Armband and Armband Alone Group * * 13

14. Triglycerides changed significantly from baseline for Group Weight Loss + Armband and Armband Alone group. * * 14

15. All intervention groups had a significant decrease in fasting blood glucose compared to control. * * * 15

16. LEAN – Cost Effectiveness/ROI Paper 16 Available online: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749379712003108 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749379712003108

17. Methods:Methods: 17 Cost-effectiveness Analysis (CEA): cost related to health improvement or benefit LEAN CEA is from organization “payer’s” perspective All costs are actual costs: includes overhead, salaries, fringe benefits, phone usage, cost of armband & monthly subscription Presents results in 2 formats: Cost ($)/participant/kg lost Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio – compares cost and effectiveness of competing interventions

18. Results:Results: 18 Assuming cost of Armband = $150, Display = $99, Subscription = $6.95/mo

19. Results:Results: 19 Standard Care (SC) did not achieve significant weight loss Group Weight Loss (GWL) is considered “Dominated” (i.e. less efficacious & more expensive) SWA cost $48.54 per kilogram lost GWL + SWA cost $60.08 more per kilogram lost than SWA For the GWL + SWA, each additional kilogram lost costs $60 more than SWA alone.

20. Groups Cost/ Person Weight Loss/ Person Cost/Person/ Weight Loss (kg) Armband Alone$183 3.55 kg (7.8 lbs) $51 Group Weight Loss$240 1.86 kg (4.1 lbs) $129 Group Weight Loss + Armband $365 6.59 kg (14.5 lbs) $55 20 LEAN Study Cost Analysis For each additional kg lost, the GWL+ Armband cost $60 more than the Armband alone.

21. Discussion:Discussion: 21 Tech-based interventions were more cost- effective and efficacious than traditional counseling SWA was the most cost-effective intervention, but adding GWL increase efficacy (but also increases cost, $60 more per kg lost)

22. Questions?