A new method of energy prescription to improve weight loss

The effect of a low-calorie diet on depressive symptoms in individuals with overweight or obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of interventional studies

BACKGROUND

Individuals with overweight or obesity are at a high risk for so-called 'atypical' or immunometabolic depression, with associated neurovegetative symptoms including overeating, fatigue, weight gain, and a poor metabolic profile evidenced e.g. by dyslipidemia or hyperglycemia. Research has generated preliminary evidence for a low-calorie diet (LCD) in reducing depressive symptoms. The aim of the current systematic review and meta-analysis is to examine this evidence to determine whether a LCD reduces depressive symptoms in people with overweight or obesity.

METHODS

Eligible studies were identified through PubMed, ISI Web of Science, and PsycINFO until August 2023. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) were derived using random-effects meta-analyses for (1) pre-post LCD comparisons of depression outcomes, and (2) LCD v. no-diet-control group comparisons of depression outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 25 studies were included in the pre-post meta-analysis, finding that depression scores were significantly lower following a LCD (SMD = -0.47), which was not significantly moderated by the addition of exercise or behavioral therapy as a non-diet adjunct. Meta-regressions indicated that a higher baseline BMI and greater weight reduction were associated with a greater reduction in depression scores. The intervention-control meta-analysis (n = 4) found that overweight or obese participants adhering to a LCD showed a nominally lower depression score compared with those given no intervention (SMD = -0.29).

CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that LCDs may reduce depressive symptoms in people with overweight or obesity in the short term. Future well-controlled intervention studies, including a non-active control group, and longer-term follow-ups, are warranted in order to make more definitive conclusions.

Weight-loss strategies used by the general population: how are they perceived?

BACKGROUND

The rising prevalence of obesity and the social pressure for thinness increase the prevalence of dieting. However, little is known about the overall perception of dieting strategies actually used by the general population.

OBJECTIVES

Our main objective was to investigate perceptions of weight-loss practices in an observational study in order to identify the most favourable strategy.

DESIGN

Adults from the ongoing Nutrinet-Santé cohort study who had reported engaging in dieting in the three previous years were included in the study. For each diet, detailed information was collected on types of diets, circumstances and perception of the diet, and outcomes. Perceptions were compared across diets using sex-specific mixed effects models.

RESULT

Among the 48 435 subjects who had completed the respective questionnaire, 12 673 (26.7%, 87.8% of women) had followed at least one weight-loss diet in the previous three years. Diet plans prescribed by health professionals and diets conforming to official dietary recommendations were the most favourably perceived among all assessed weight-loss strategies. Alternatively, commercial diet plans and self-imposed dietary restrictions were more negatively perceived (Odds ratios (OR) for adherence difficulty 1.30 (95% confidence interval (0.99;1.7)) in men and OR 1.92 (1.76;2.10) in women compared to official nutritional guidelines; OR 1.06 (0.82;1.38) in men and OR 1.39 (1.26;1.54) in women respectively) compared to official nutritional guidelines.

CONCLUSION

Official dietary recommendations could be useful tools for maintaining a dietary balance while following a weight-loss diet.

Interventions to enhance adherence to dietary advice for preventing and managing chronic diseases in adults

BACKGROUND

It has been recognized that poor adherence can be a serious risk to the health and wellbeing of patients, and greater adherence to dietary advice is a critical component in preventing and managing chronic diseases.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interventions for enhancing adherence to dietary advice for preventing and managing chronic diseases in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases up to 29 September 2010: The Cochrane Library (issue 9 2010), PubMed, EMBASE (Embase.com), CINAHL (Ebsco) and PsycINFO (PsycNET) with no language restrictions. We also reviewed: a) recent years of relevant conferences, symposium and colloquium proceedings and abstracts; b) web-based registries of clinical trials; and c) the bibliographies of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials that evaluated interventions enhancing adherence to dietary advice for preventing and managing chronic diseases in adults. Studies were eligible if the primary outcome was the client's adherence to dietary advice. We defined 'client' as an adult participating in a chronic disease prevention or chronic disease management study involving dietary advice.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility of the studies. They also assessed the risk of bias and extracted data using a modified version of the Cochrane Consumers and Communication Review Group data extraction template. Any discrepancies in judgement were resolved by discussion and consensus, or with a third review author. Because the studies differed widely with respect to interventions, measures of diet adherence, dietary advice, nature of the chronic diseases and duration of interventions and follow-up, we conducted a qualitative analysis. We classified included studies according to the function of the intervention and present results in a narrative table using vote counting for each category of intervention.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 38 studies involving 9445 participants. Among studies that measured diet adherence outcomes between an intervention group and a control/usual care group, 32 out of 123 diet adherence outcomes favoured the intervention group, 4 favoured the control group whereas 62 had no significant difference between groups (assessment was impossible for 25 diet adherence outcomes since data and/or statistical analyses needed for comparison between groups were not provided). Interventions shown to improve at least one diet adherence outcome are: telephone follow-up, video, contract, feedback, nutritional tools and more complex interventions including multiple interventions. However, these interventions also shown no difference in some diet adherence outcomes compared to a control/usual care group making inconclusive results about the most effective intervention to enhance dietary advice. The majority of studies reporting a diet adherence outcome favouring the intervention group compared to the control/usual care group in the short-term also reported no significant effect at later time points. Studies investigating interventions such as a group session, individual session, reminders, restriction and behaviour change techniques reported no diet adherence outcome showing a statistically significant difference favouring the intervention group. Finally, studies were generally of short duration and low quality, and adherence measures varied widely.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is a need for further, long-term, good-quality studies using more standardized and validated measures of adherence to identify the interventions that should be used in practice to enhance adherence to dietary advice in the context of a variety of chronic diseases.

Low or moderate dietary energy restriction for long-term weight loss: what works best?

Theoretical calculations suggest that small daily reductions in energy intake can cumulatively lead to substantial weight loss, but experimental data to support these calculations are lacking. We conducted a 1-year randomized controlled pilot study of low (10%) or moderate (30%) energy restriction (ER) with diets differing in glycemic load in 38 overweight adults (mean +/- s.d., age 35 +/- 6 years; BMI 27.6 +/- 1.4 kg/m(2)). Food was provided for 6 months and self-selected for 6 additional months. Measurements included body weight, resting metabolic rate (RMR), adherence to the ER prescription assessed using (2)H(2)(18)O, satiety, and eating behavior variables. The 10%ER group consumed significantly less energy (by (2)H(2)(18)O) than prescribed over 12 months (18.1 +/- 9.8%ER, P = 0.04), while the 30%ER group consumed significantly more (23.1 +/- 8.7%ER, P < 0.001). Changes in body weight, satiety, and other variables were not significantly different between groups. However, during self-selected eating (6-12 months) variability in % weight change was significantly greater in the 10%ER group (P < 0.001) and poorer weight outcome on 10%ER was predicted by higher baseline BMI and greater disinhibition (P < 0.0001; adj R(2) = 0.71). Weight loss at 12 months was not significantly different between groups prescribed 10 or 30%ER, supporting the efficacy of low ER recommendations. However, long-term weight change was more variable on 10%ER and weight change in this group was predicted by body size and eating behavior. These preliminary results indicate beneficial effects of low-level ER for some but not all individuals in a weight control program, and suggest testable approaches for optimizing dieting success based on individualizing prescribed level of ER.