Division of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany.
Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Heidelberg, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany.
Nutrients. 2021 Apr 5;13(4):1195. doi: 10.3390/nu13041195.
Although intermittent calorie restriction (ICR) has become popular as an alternative weight loss strategy to continuous calorie restriction (CCR), there is insufficient evidence on diet quality during ICR and on its feasibility over longer time periods. Thus, we compared dietary composition and adherence between ICR and CCR in a follow-up analysis of a randomized trial. A total of 98 participants with overweight or obesity [BMI (kg/m) 25-39.9, 35-65 years, 49% females] were randomly assigned to ICR, operationalized as a "5:2 diet" (energy intake: ~100% on five non-restricted (NR) days, ~25% on two restricted (R) days), or CCR (daily energy intake: ~80%). The trial included a 12-week (wk) intervention phase, and follow-up assessments at wk24, wk50 and wk102. Apart from a higher proportion of energy intake from protein with ICR vs. CCR during the intervention (wk2: < 0.001; wk12: = 0.002), there were no significant differences with respect to changes in dietary composition over time between the groups, while overall adherence to the interventions appeared to be good. No significant difference between ICR and CCR regarding weight change at wk102 was observed ( = 0.63). However, self-reported adherence was worse for ICR than CCR, with 71.1% vs. 32.5% of the participants reporting not to or only rarely have followed the regimen to which they were assigned between wk50 and wk102. These results indicate that within a weight management setting, ICR and CCR were equivalent in achieving modest weight loss over two years while affecting dietary composition in a comparable manner.
虽然间歇性热量限制(ICR)作为连续热量限制(CCR)的替代减肥策略已变得流行,但关于 ICR 期间的饮食质量及其在较长时间内的可行性的证据不足。因此,我们在一项随机试验的随访分析中比较了 ICR 和 CCR 的饮食组成和依从性。共有 98 名超重或肥胖者(BMI(kg/m 2 )25-39.9,35-65 岁,49%为女性)被随机分配到 ICR 组,其方案为“5:2 饮食”(能量摄入:非限制日 5 天为 100%,限制日 2 天为 25%)或 CCR 组(每日能量摄入为 80%)。试验包括 12 周的干预阶段,以及 24 周、50 周和 102 周的随访评估。除了 ICR 组在干预期间(第 2 周:<0.001;第 12 周:=0.002)摄入的蛋白质能量比例高于 CCR 组外,两组之间随着时间的推移饮食组成的变化没有显著差异,而总体上干预措施的依从性似乎很好。在第 102 周时,ICR 和 CCR 之间的体重变化没有显著差异(=0.63)。然而,与 CCR 相比,ICR 的自我报告依从性较差,在第 50 周至第 102 周期间,有 71.1%的参与者报告没有或仅偶尔遵守他们所分配的方案,而 CCR 组的这一比例为 32.5%。这些结果表明,在体重管理环境中,ICR 和 CCR 在两年内实现适度减肥方面等效,同时以类似的方式影响饮食组成。