: Tirzepatide is a novel therapeutic option for the management of metabolic disorders which has started to be implemented in routine practice. The study aimed to analyze the effectiveness of tirzepatide use and patient education in the field of healthy eating and weight loss, based on real-life data from the practice of a primary care physician, in metabolic syndrome (MetSyn) patients during a one-year follow-up period.: This is a retrospective study based on real-life data of 118 MetSyn patients who were under the supervision of a general practitioner (GP). Analysis was conducted on 62 patients supported by trizepatide (2.5 mg for 4 weeks, then 5 mg for 4 weeks and 7 mg for 46 weeks) with dietary education and 56 patients that underwent dietary education with motivation only. Lipid profile, glucose level and blood pressure were assessed. Body Mass Index (BMI), waist-to-height ratio (WHtR), A Body Shape Index (ABSI), Lipid Accumulation Product (LAP), Visceral Adiposity Index (VAI) and Body Roundness Index (BRI) were calculated. The KomPANquestionnaire was used for dietary assessment and WHO Quality of Life-BREF for the quality of life assessment at 52 weeks.: Patients from both groups significantly reduced their body weight and WC and the values of the following indices: BMI, WHtR, ABSI, LAP and BRI. A significant increase in LDL cholesterol and triglyceride values was observed in both groups and a significant decrease in glucose level only in the group with tirzepatide combined with dietary modification. Energy value, energy density of food and nutrient intake did not differ between groups, while the intensity of beneficial nutritional features (pHDI-10) was low. Significant differences in patients' QoL were observed, especially in the domain related to mental health (higher in trizepatide + diet group).: Support in primary care by a physician was successful from a long-term perspective in the group using tirzepatide in combination with diet modification as well as in the group based on dietary modification only. The data do not indicate a significant advantage of any one approach for patients, prioritizing an individualized approach to treatment. Background Methods Results Conclusions ®
