| Literature DB >> 29202751 |
Cheryl L Rock1, Shirley W Flatt2, Hava-Shoshana Barkai2, Bilge Pakiz2, Dennis D Heath2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dietary strategies that help patients adhere to a weight reduction diet may increase the likelihood of weight loss maintenance and improved long-term health outcomes. Regular nut consumption has been associated with better weight management and less adiposity. The objective of this study was to compare the effects of a walnut-enriched reduced-energy diet to a standard reduced-energy-density diet on weight, cardiovascular disease risk factors, and satiety.Entities:
Keywords: Blood pressure; Cardiovascular disease risk factors; Nuts; Satiety; Weight loss
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29202751 PMCID: PMC5715655 DOI: 10.1186/s12937-017-0304-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutr J ISSN: 1475-2891 Impact factor: 3.271
Fig. 1Flow chart for study participants
Characteristics of study participants in the weight reduction intervention
| Standard reduced-energy-density diet ( | Walnut-enriched reduced-energy diet ( |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sex (N [%]) | 0.53 | ||
| Female | 27 (53%) | 31 (63%) | |
| Male | 24 (47%) | 18 (37%) | |
| Age (years), mean (SE) | 52.2 (1.6) | 53.3 (1.4) | 0.63 |
| Education (years), mean (SE) | 16.1 (0.3) | 16.2 (0.3) | 0.88 |
| Race/ethnicity (%) | 0.84 | ||
| Non-Hispanic white | 73 | 73 | |
| Hispanic/Latino | 14 | 18 | |
| African-American | 6 | 2 | |
| Asian-American | 2 | 2 | |
| Mixed/other | 6 | 4 | |
*p values are from chi-square tests (categorical variables), or t-tests (continuous variables)
Body measurements of study participants in the weight reduction intervention
| Standard reduced- energy-density diet | Walnut-enriched reduced-energy diet |
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | Mean (SE) | n | Mean (SE) | ||
| Body weight, kg a | |||||
| Baseline | 51 | 90.9 (1.8) | 49 | 91.1 (2.3) | 0.96 |
| 3 Months | 51 | 84.7 (1.8) | 48 | 85.9 (2.3) | 0.70 |
| 6 Months | 50 | 82.1 (2.0) | 47 | 82.4 (2.2) | 0.92 |
| Body mass index, kg/m2 a | |||||
| Baseline | 51 | 32.4 (0.4) | 49 | 32.4 (0.5) | 0.96 |
| 3 Months | 51 | 30.3 (0.5) | 48 | 30.6 (0.5) | 0.63 |
| 6 Months | 50 | 29.4 (0.6) | 47 | 29.6 (0.5) | 0.77 |
| Weight change, kg | |||||
| 3 Months | 51 | −6.0 (0.6) | 48 | −5.5 (0.5) | 0.51 |
| 6 Months | 50 | −8.5 (0.9) | 47 | −7.9 (0.6) | 0.58 |
| % Weight change | |||||
| 3 Months | 51 | −6.6 (0.6) | 48 | −6.1 (0.6) | 0.53 |
| 6 Months | 50 | −9.4 (0.9) | 47 | −8.9 (0.7) | 0.63 |
| Waist circumference, cm a | |||||
| Baseline | 51 | 109.9 (1.2) | 49 | 111.5 (1.6) | 0.42 |
| 3 Months | 51 | 101.7 (1.3) | 48 | 104.6 (1.6) | 0.16 |
| 6 Months | 50 | 98.9 (1.4) | 47 | 100.7 (1.5) | 0.39 |
a Body weight, body mass index, and waist circumference showed a significant time effect compared with baseline, p < 0.001 for each variable, in both study groups at each follow-up point
Blood pressure and physical activity variables for study participants in the weight reduction intervention
| Standard reduced-energy-density diet | Walnut-enriched reduced-energy diet |
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | Mean(SE) | n | Mean(SE) | ||
| Systolic blood pressure, mm Hg | |||||
| Baseline | 51 | 123 (2) | 49 | 124 (3) | 0.77 |
| 3 Months | 49 | 117 (2) * | 48 | 116 (2) * | 0.73 |
| 6 Months | 49 | 119 (2) | 46 | 118 (2) * | 0.68 |
| Diastolic blood pressure, mm Hg | |||||
| Baseline | 51 | 82 (1) | 49 | 82 (2) | 0.72 |
| 3 Months | 49 | 77 (1) * | 48 | 76 (1) * | 0.57 |
| 6 Months | 49 | 78 (2) * | 46 | 77 (1) * | 0.70 |
| Moderate/strenuous physical activity, minutes/week | |||||
| Baseline | 51 | 120 (22) | 49 | 133 (18) | 0.53 |
| 3 Months | 51 | 328 (31) * | 48 | 337 (33) * | 0.84 |
| 6 Months | 49 | 351 (31) * | 47 | 321 (29) * | 0.48 |
| % Meeting physical activity recommendations | |||||
| Baseline | 51 | 25 | 49 | 45 | 0.04 |
| 3 Months | 51 | 78 | 48 | 79 | 0.93 |
| 6 Months | 47 | 85 | 47 | 81 | 0.58 |
| Step test, heart rate/30s | |||||
| Baseline | 51 | 57 (2) | 49 | 60 (2) | 0.14 |
| 3 Months | 47 | 47 (1) * | 47 | 49 (1) * | 0.33 |
| 6 Months | 47 | 45 (1)* | 45 | 47 (1) * | 0.18 |
* Different from baseline within group, p < 0.01 for each
Biological measures of study participants in the weight reduction intervention
| Standard reduced-energy-density diet | Walnut-enriched reduced-energy diet |
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean(SE) | Mean(SE) | |||
| Cholesterol, mg/dL | 0.84 | |||
| Baseline | 200 (5) | 203 (6) | 0.76 | |
| 3 Months | 199 (5) | 198 (5) | 0.95 | |
| 6 Months | 194 (6) | 194 (6) a | 0.91 | |
| Triglycerides, mg/dL | 0.50 | |||
| Baseline | 130 (10) | 123 (7) | 0.55 | |
| 3 Months | 110 (8) a | 115 (9) | 0.66 | |
| 6 Months | 109 (9) a | 103 (6) a | 0.61 | |
| HDL cholesterol, mg/dL | 0.08 | |||
| Baseline | 58 (2) | 59 (2) | 0.70 | |
| 3 Months | 60 (2) | 58 (2) | 0.37 | |
| 6 Months | 60 (2) | 61 (2) | 0.94 | |
| LDL Cholesterol, mg/dL | 0.60 | |||
| Baseline | 116 (4) | 121 (5) | 0.42 | |
| 3 Months | 116 (5) | 116 (4) | 0.80 | |
| 6 Months | 112 (5) | 112 (5) a | 0.96 | |
| Alpha-tocopherol, μmol/L | 0.96 | |||
| Baseline | 30.5 (1.3) | 30.8 (1.0) | 0.83 | |
| 3 Months | 30.0 (1.1) | 30.3 (1.2) | 0.72 | |
| 6 Months | 31.6 (1.2) | 32.2 (1.3) | 0.84 | |
| Beta-tocopherol, μmol/L | 0.70 | |||
| Baseline | 0.33 (0.02) | 0.33 (0.01) | 0.38 | |
| 3 Months | 0.38 (0.01) a | 0.27 (0.01) a | 0.38 | |
| 6 Months | 0.28 (0.01) a | 0.26 (0.01) a | 0.99 | |
| Gamma-tocopherol, μmol/L | 0.48 | |||
| Baseline | 4.23 (0.29) | 3.99 (0.27) | 0.55 | |
| 3 Months | 4.04 (0.31) | 4.13 (0.20) | 0.82 | |
| 6 Months | 4.08 (0.33) | 4.30 (0.29) | 0.74 | |
| Delta-tocopherol, μmol/L | 0.98 | |||
| Baseline | 0.11 (0.01) | 0.11 (0.01) | 0.82 | |
| 3 Months | 0.10 (0.01) | 0.10 (0.01) | 0.88 | |
| 6 Months | 0.09 (0.01) a | 0.08 (0.01) a | 0.76 | |
| Linoleic acid, % | <0.001 | |||
| Baseline | 0.111 (0.002) | 0.110 (0.002) | 0.77 | |
| 3 Months | 0.104 (0.002) a | 0.111 (0.002) | 0.004 | |
| 6 Months | 0.107 (0.002) a | 0.112 (0.001) a | 0.01 | |
| Alpha-linolenic acid, % | <0.001 | |||
| Baseline | 0.00122 (0.00006) | 0.00118 (0.00004) | 0.57 | |
| 3 Months | 0.00105 (0.00006) a | 0.00147 (0.00005) a | <0.001 | |
| 6 Months | 0.00118 (0.00005) | 0.00158 (0.00007) a | <0.001 | |
a Different from baseline within group, p < 0.05
Self-reported satiety (on a 100-point visual analog scale where Hunger is scored 0 = very hungry, 100 = not hungry at all; Fullness is scored 0 = not full, 100 = full; Quantity is scored 0 = nothing, 100 = a lot) in the weight reduction intervention
| Standard reduced-energy-density diet, mean(SEM) | Walnut-enriched reduced-energy diet, mean(SEM) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lunch | Dinner | Lunch | Dinner | |
| Hunger | ||||
| Week 1 | 43 (3) | 40 (4) | 49 (3) | 40 (3) |
| Week 6 | 50 (4) | 43 (4) | 42 (4) | 45 (4) |
| Week 12 | 53 (5) a | 49 (4) a | 44 (4) | 44 (4) |
| Fullness | ||||
| Week 1 | 44(4) | 48 (5) | 51(4) | 51(5) |
| Week 6 | 53 (5) | 53 (42) | 58 (4) | 52 (5) |
| Week 12 | 52 (6) a | 61 (5) a | 48 (4) b | 49 (4) b |
| Quantity | ||||
| Week 1 | 44(4) | 50 (4) | 49 (3) | 55(4) |
| Week 6 | 49 (4) | 53 (4) | 48 (4) | 47 (4) |
| Week 12 | 41 (4) | 38 (5) | 44 (3) | 49 (4) |
a Both hunger and fullness were greater at week 12 than week 1 in the standard reduced-energy-density diet group (p < 0.05)
b At week 12, fullness was lower in the walnut-rich diet arm than in the standard reduced-energy-density diet group (p = 0.04)