scholarly journals Protein Intakes Above the Recommended Dietary Allowance Reduce Fat Mass Irrespective of Energy Balance and Resistance Training Status: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (P08-056-19)

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Bergia ◽  
Yu Wang ◽  
Joshua Hudson ◽  
Wayne Campbell

Abstract Objectives The recommended dietary allowance (RDA) for protein of 0.8 g/kg/d is the current standard of dietary adequacy. Research assessing the effects of higher protein intakes on body composition often focus on changes in lean mass and use the RDA as the reference protein intake. However, it is important to also assess the importance of protein intake on fat mass, which relates to cardiometabolic health indices. Therefore, we sought to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the effects of protein intakes greater than versus at the RDA on changes in whole body fat mass. Methods Three researchers independently screened 1531 articles published through August 2018 using PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases, with additional articles identified through previously published review articles. Randomized-controlled, parallel studies at least 6 weeks long on apparently healthy adults (> = 19 years old) were eligible for data extraction. Results Data from 16 randomized-controlled, parallel studies resulting in 20 comparisons of fat mass changes were included in the final analysis. This abstract presents sub-analyses for comparisons with catabolic and anabolic stimuli, specifically energy restriction (ER) and/or resistance training (RT), respectively. Among all comparisons, consuming greater than the protein RDA resulted in greater fat mass change [–0.81 kg (–1.25, –0.37); WMD (95% CI), n = 20 comparisons]. The beneficial effect of greater protein intake on adiposity was apparent irrespective of energy or training status. Groups consuming greater than the RDA with ER lost more fat mass [–0.91 kg (–1.55, –0.28), n = 13], and groups consuming greater than the RDA without ER lost fat mass, while there was no reduction in groups consuming the RDA [–0.65 kg (–1.29, –0.05), n = 7]. Greater protein intake promoted fat mass loss with RT [–0.91 kg (–1.55, –0.28), n = 2] and without RT [–0.65 kg (–1.29, –0.05), n = 18]. Conclusions These results support protein intakes greater than the RDA to reduce fat mass, irrespective of energy balance and resistance training status. Funding Sources No external funding was provided.

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
José Francisco Meneses-Echávez ◽  
Emilio González-Jiménez ◽  
Robinson Ramírez-Vélez

Objective. Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is the most common and devastating problem in cancer patients even after successful treatment. This study aimed to determine the effects of supervised multimodal exercise interventions on cancer-related fatigue through a systematic review and meta-analysis.Design. A systematic review was conducted to determine the effectiveness of multimodal exercise interventions on CRF. Databases of PubMed, CENTRAL, EMBASE, and OVID were searched between January and March 2014 to retrieve randomized controlled trials. Risk of bias was evaluated using the PEDro scale.Results. Nine studiesn=772were included in both systematic review and meta-analysis. Multimodal interventions including aerobic exercise, resistance training, and stretching improved CRF symptoms (SMD=-0.23; 95% CI: −0.37 to −0.09;P=0.001). These effects were also significant in patients undergoing chemotherapyP<0.0001. Nonsignificant differences were found for resistance training interventionsP=0.30. Slight evidence of publication bias was observedP=0.04. The studies had a low risk of bias (PEDro scale mean score of 6.4 (standard deviation (SD) ± 1.0)).Conclusion. Supervised multimodal exercise interventions including aerobic, resistance, and stretching exercises are effective in controlling CRF. These findings suggest that these exercise protocols should be included as a crucial part of the rehabilitation programs for cancer survivors and patients during anticancer treatments.


2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. A8-A9
Author(s):  
Darin Ruanpeng ◽  
Sikarin Upala ◽  
Anawin Sanguankeo

Abstract Introduction: Time-restricted eating (TRE) or time-restricted feeding (TRF), a form of intermittent fasting (IF) when food consumption is restricted to a 4–12 hour window, poses unique possible health benefits that allow the nutrient to work in harmony with circadian rhythm. Whether TRF is effective in weight loss and cardiometabolic profile compare to usual diet is controversial. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized control trials to investigate the weight and metabolic effects of TRF in humans. Methods: The systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. The literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL from database inception to November 30, 2020. The search terms included time restricting feeding, time-restricted eating, periodic fasting, intermittent fasting, and periodic fasting. The eligibility criteria included a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing the effect of TRF as an intervention and control diet on weight and cardiometabolic risks in individuals with overweight (BMI 23–26.9 kg/m2 in Asian and 25–29.9 kg/m2 in others) or obesity (BMI≥27 kg/m2 in Asian and ≥30 kg/m2 in others) with study duration of at least 8 weeks. The primary outcome is the change in body weight between preintervention and postintervention. The secondary outcome is the change in total fat mass and lean mass, HDL, LDL, and triglycerides. Pool mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated for each outcome. Results: Four articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. There were 511 participants with BMI 24 kg/m2 and above and aged between 18 and 65. TRF was defined as a 4–8 hours ad-lib unrestricted eating in 24 hours. The control diet was defined as ad-lib eating per usual habits. There was a significant improvement in weight and body composition in the TRF group. The mean weight loss was -2.08 kg (95% CI: -3.49 to -0.68) greater among TRF group. There was a significant total fat mass and lean mass loss in the TRF group with the MD of -1.29 kg (95% CI: -2.04 to -0.54) and -0.59 kg (95% CI: -1.15 to -0.03), respectively. There was no significant change in HDL, LDL, or triglycerides comparing between TRF and control diet. Conclusion: This systematic review and meta-analysis of RCT showed that TRF with no calories restriction resulted in significant decreased in weight, fat mass, and a slight decreased in total lean mass compared with control diet. Our findings support TRF as an effective lifestyle intervention for weight loss.


2020 ◽  
Vol 150 (6) ◽  
pp. 1443-1460 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janine Wirth ◽  
Elaine Hillesheim ◽  
Lorraine Brennan

ABSTRACT Background Increased protein intake has been suggested to improve gains in muscle mass and strength in adults. Furthermore, the timing of protein intake has been discussed as a margin of opportunity for improved prevention measures. Objective This systematic review investigated the effect of protein supplementation on body composition and muscle function (strength and synthesis) in healthy adults, with an emphasis on the timing of protein intake. Methods Randomized controlled trials were identified using PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Embase, up to March 2019. For meta-analyses, data on lean body mass (LBM), handgrip strength, and leg press strength were pooled by age group (mean age 18–55 or &gt;55 y) and timing of protein intake. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approach. Results Data from 65 studies with 2907 participants (1514 men and 1380 women, 13 unknown sex) were included in the review. Twenty-six, 8, and 24 studies were used for meta-analysis on LBM, handgrip strength, and leg press strength, respectively. The protein supplementation was effective in improving (mean difference; 95% CI) LBM in adults (0.62 kg; 0.36, 0.88) and older adults (0.46 kg; 0.23, 0.70), but not handgrip strength (older adults: 0.26 kg; −0.51, 1.04) and leg press strength (adults: 5.80 kg; −0.33, 11.93; older adults: 1.97 kg; −2.78, 6.72). Sensitivity analyses removing studies without exercise training had no impact on the outcomes. Data regarding muscle synthesis were scarce and inconclusive. Subgroup analyses showed no beneficial effect of a specific timing of protein intake on LBM, handgrip strength, and leg press strength. Conclusion Overall, the results support the positive impact of protein supplementation on LBM of adults and older adults, independently of intake timing. Effects on muscle strength and synthesis are less clear and need further investigation. This systematic review was registered on PROSPERO as CRD42019126742.


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Linqian Lu ◽  
Lin Mao ◽  
Yuwei Feng ◽  
Barbara E. Ainsworth ◽  
Yu Liu ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to clarify the effects of different exercise modes (resistance training [RT], whole body vibration training [WBVT], and mixed training [MT, resistance training combined with other exercises such as balance, endurance and aerobic training]) on muscle strength (knee extension strength [KES]) and physical performance (Timed Up and Go [TUG], gait speed [GS] and the Chair Stand [CS]) in older people with sarcopenia. Method All studies published from January 2010 to March 2021 on the effects of exercise training in older people with sarcopenia were retrieved from 6 electronic databases: Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang Database. Two researchers independently extracted and evaluated studies that met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Pooled analyses for pre- and post- outcome measurements were performed using Review Manager 5.4 with standardized mean differences (SMDs) and fixed-effect models. Result Twenty-six studies (25 randomized controlled trails [RCTs] and one non-randomized controlled trail) were included in this study with 1191 older people with sarcopenia (mean age 60.6 ± 2.3 to 89.5 ± 4.4). Compared with a control group, RT and MT significantly improved KES (RT, SMD = 1.36, 95% confidence intervals [95% CI]: 0.71 to 2.02, p < 0.0001, I2 = 72%; MT, SMD = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.29 to 0.95, p = 0.0002, I2 = 56%) and GS (RT, SMD = 2.01, 95% CI: 1.04 to 2.97, p < 0.0001, I2 = 84%; MT, SMD = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.29 to 1.09, p = 0.008, I2 = 81%). WBVT showed no changes in KES (SMD = 0.65, 95% CI: − 0.02 to 1.31, p = 0.06, I2 = 80%) or GS (SMD = 0.12, 95% CI: − 0.15 to 0.39, p = 0.38, I2 = 0%). TUG times were significantly improved with all exercise training modes (SMD = -0.66, 95% CI: − 0.94 to − 0.38, p < 0.00001, I2 = 60%). There were no changes in CS times with any of the exercise training modes (SMD = 0.11, 95% CI: − 0.36 to 0.57, p = 0.65, I2 = 87%). Conclusions In older people with sarcopenia, KES and GS can be improved by RT and MT, but not by WBVT. All three training modes improved TUG times, but not improved CS times.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document