METHODS: Data from a cross-sectional survey of 268 public and private doctors and allied health practitioners in Peninsular Malaysia were used for this analysis. Using Rasch analysis, overall model fit and item fit of the summary UMB Fat and domain scores were examined, together with unidimensionality, response threshold ordering, internal consistency, measurement invariance, and item targeting.
RESULTS: Data showed overall misfit to the Rasch model for both the summary UMB Fat score and domain scores. Whilst unidimensionality was observed for the domain scores, this was not evident for the summary score where multiple local dependencies were present. Disordered thresholds were observed for the response format, in which the majority improved with modification. Suboptimal targeting was also detected with an uneven distribution of items at the upper and lower end of the logit scale for the summary and domain scores. Despite this, excellent internal consistency reliability was observed (person separation index: 0.76-0.89), and no measurement invariance was detected.
CONCLUSION: The Rasch model supports reporting of the UMB Fat domain scores but not the summary score. Several issues related to local dependencies and response format were identified that could benefit from refining the UMB Fat to improve measurement accuracy, particularly when used by healthcare practitioners in Asian countries.
METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted from May to August 2022 with health practitioners commonly involved in obesity management in Peninsular Malaysia, including doctors in primary care, internal medicine and bariatric surgery, and allied health practitioners. The survey explored practitioners' perceptions, barriers and needs in managing obesity, and evaluated weight stigma using the Universal Measures of Bias - Fat (UMB Fat) questionnaire. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to identify demographic and clinical-related factors associated with higher negative judgment towards patients with obesity.
RESULTS: A total of 209 participants completed the survey (completion rate of 55.4%). The majority (n = 196, 94.3%) agreed that obesity is a chronic disease, perceived a responsibility to provide care (n = 176, 84.2%) and were motivated to help patients to lose weight (n = 160, 76.6%). However, only 22% (n = 46) thought their patients were motivated to lose weight. The most frequently reported barriers to obesity discussions were short consultation time, patients' lack of motivation, and having other, more important, concerns to discuss. Practitioners needed support with access to multi-disciplinary care, advanced obesity training, financing, comprehensive obesity management guidelines and access to obesity medications. The mean (SD) of the UMB Fat summary score was 2.99 (0.87), with the mean (SD) domain scores ranging between 2.21 and 4.36 (1.06 to 1.45). No demographic and clinical-related factors were significantly associated with negative judgment from the multiple linear regression analyses.
CONCLUSION: Practitioners in this study considered obesity a chronic disease. While they had the motivation and capacity to engage in obesity management, physical and social opportunities were the reasons for not discussing obesity with their patients. Practitioners needed more support to enhance their capability and opportunity to engage with obesity management. Weight stigma in healthcare settings in Malaysia should be addressed, given the possibility of hindering weight discussions with patients.