School of Biosciences and Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey, UK.
School of Biosciences and Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey, UK.
Appetite. 2021 Sep 1;164:105240. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2021.105240. Epub 2021 Apr 2.
The interaction between time of day and energy intake, termed chrono-nutrition, has received considerable recent interest. One aspect of chrono-nutrition with potential to benefit long-term cardio-metabolic health is time-restricted feeding (TRF). Current support for TRF primarily derives from animal research, although recent small-scale human studies indicate possible translational benefit. Whether free-living humans, however, can incorporate TRF into their daily lives is poorly understood. This study reports data from participants (n = 608) who completed an online questionnaire to investigate daily routine, likelihood of TRF incorporation within work vs free-days, and key considerations influencing TRF uptake. The majority of participants reported a typical daily feeding window (time between first and last energy intake) of between 10 and 14 h on workdays and free days, 62.7 and 65.5% respectively. Likelihood of adherence to TRF declined with an increase in the proposed restriction of the feeding window by 0.5 to 4-h per day. We then examined data from participants with a typical daily feeding window of 12+ h on workdays (n = 221) and free-days (n = 223) to investigate the likelihood of using TRF, and the most important considerations in making this decision. Of these participants, (n = 132) on workdays and (n = 125) on free days would likely reduce their feeding window by 3-h. Multiple regression analysis revealed that key considerations determining the likelihood of adopting TRF were: cost, time availability, and perceived health benefits (on workdays); wake time, bed time, time availability, motivation to change and perceived health benefits (on free-days). These data provide novel information regarding public attitudes towards TRF and highlight important aspects to be considered when translating controlled laboratory studies to public dietary advice.
昼夜节律和能量摄入的相互作用，称为“时间营养”，最近引起了广泛关注。时间限制进食（TRF）是一种具有潜在益处的长期心脏代谢健康的时间营养方面。目前，对 TRF 的支持主要来自动物研究，尽管最近的小规模人体研究表明可能具有转化效益。然而，自由生活的人类是否能够将 TRF 融入日常生活中还知之甚少。本研究报告了来自参与者（n=608）的在线问卷调查数据，该调查旨在研究日常习惯、TRF 在工作日和休息日纳入的可能性，以及影响 TRF 采用的关键因素。大多数参与者报告说，在工作日和休息日，典型的每日进食窗口（第一次和最后一次能量摄入之间的时间）分别在 10 到 14 小时之间，分别为 62.7%和 65.5%。随着每天进食窗口的建议限制增加 0.5 到 4 小时，遵守 TRF 的可能性降低。然后，我们检查了工作日和休息日典型每日进食窗口为 12 小时以上的参与者的数据（n=221），以调查使用 TRF 的可能性，以及做出此决定的最重要考虑因素。在这些参与者中，（n=132）在工作日和（n=125）在休息日可能会将他们的进食窗口减少 3 小时。多元回归分析显示，决定采用 TRF 的可能性的关键考虑因素是：成本、时间可用性和感知健康益处（在工作日）；醒来时间、睡觉时间、时间可用性、改变的动机和感知健康益处（在休息日）。这些数据提供了关于公众对 TRF 的态度的新信息，并强调了将受控实验室研究转化为公共饮食建议时需要考虑的重要方面。
