| Literature DB >> 30858985 |
Aslaug Drotningsvik1,2, Åge Oterhals3, Ola Flesland2, Ottar Nygård4,5, Oddrun A Gudbrandsen1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Age-related loss of muscle mass and function is common in older adults, and studies investigating if dietary proteins may protect and possibly build lean body mass are needed. We assessed the feasibility of conducting a nutritional intervention study in older nursing home residents to investigate the effects of fish protein supplementation on markers of glucose metabolism and inflammation.Entities:
Keywords: Fish protein; Frail elderly; Nursing homes; Pilot study; Sarcopenia
Year: 2019 PMID: 30858985 PMCID: PMC6390537 DOI: 10.1186/s40814-019-0421-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pilot Feasibility Stud ISSN: 2055-5784
Daily dosage of indispensable amino acids from the blue whiting protein hydrolysate supplement
| Amino acids, mg/day | Blue whiting protein hydrolysate |
|---|---|
| Histidine | 93.0 |
| Isoleucine | 198.4 |
| Leucine | 378.2 |
| Lysine | 477.4 |
| Methionine | 148.8 |
| Phenylalanine | 167.4 |
| Threonine | 223.2 |
| Tryptophan | 42.2 |
| Valine | 223.2 |
Fig. 1Flow diagram of study participants
Participant characteristics at baseline
| Intervention group | Control group | |
|---|---|---|
| Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) | |
| Women/men | 8/4 | 7/2 |
| Age, years | 84 (8) | 87 (5) |
| Upper arm circumference, cm | 27.9 (3.2) | 27.6 (3.8) |
| Calf circumference, cm | 34.6 (2.5) | 33.3 (5.9) |
| Biceps skinfold thickness, mm | 8.5 (3.9) | 8.2 (3.2) |
| Triceps skinfold thickness, mm | 15.3 (5.2) | 16.1 (4.7) |
| ADL score | 14 (5) | 12 (4) |
| MNA score | 12 (1) | 12 (2) |
| Number of diagnoses | 5 (4) | 4 (1) |
| Number of medications | 10 (7) | 9 (2) |
| Protein intake, g/kg BW/day | 0.98 (0.30) | 0.82 (0.17) |
| Energy intake, kcal/kg BW/day | 22 (5) | 23 (3) |
| Body weight, kg | 69.4 (12.6) | 63.7 (14.0) |
| Hand grip strength, kg | 18 (8) | 16 (11) |
Data is presented as mean and standard deviation with n = 12 in the intervention group and n = 9 in the control group. Differences between groups were compared using independent samples t test; Pearson’s chi-squared test was used to compare categorical data between groups. p value < 0.05 was considered significant. No significant differences between groups were observed. ADL activities of daily living; MNA mini nutritional assessment; BW body weight
Serum concentration of markers of inflammation and glucose metabolism
| Baseline | Endpoint | Mean difference in change between groupsa | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) | Mean (95% CI) | |
| MCP-1, pg/ml | |||
| Intervention group | 178 (70) | 159 (63) | − 80 (− 146, − 13)* |
| Control group | 364 (324) | 425 (401) | |
| CRP, mg/l | |||
| Intervention group | 3.77 (7.68) | 6.29 (8.91) | 0.77 (− 6.83, 8.37)* |
| Control group | 8.71 (11.50) | 10.46 (17.14) | |
| Glucose, mmol/l | |||
| Intervention group | 5.82 (1.00) | 5.77 (1.14) | − 0.02 (− 0.41, 0.38) |
| Control group | 5.59 (0.62) | 5.56 (0.62) | |
| Insulin, ng/ml | |||
| Intervention group | 0.36 (0.13) | 0.34 (0.12) | − 0.09 (− 0.23,0.04) |
| Control group | 0.51 (0.42) | 0.58 (0.61) | |
| Fructosamine, μmol/l | |||
| Intervention group | 280 (40) | 280 (36) | 2.86 (−13.74, 19.46) |
| Control group | 259 (26) | 256 (31) | |
Data is presented as mean and standard deviation with n = 12 in the intervention group and n = 9 in the control group. For serum insulin concentrations, one participant in the intervention group used insulin and was therefore excluded; thus, results are presented for n = 11 in the intervention group and n = 9 in the control group. The groups were similar at baseline (independent samples t test). MCP-1, CRP and insulin were log-transformed prior to testing; within-group changes were tested using paired samples t test, and no significant changes within groups were observed. Within group changes were compared between groups using independent samples t test. p value < 0.05 was considered significant. MCP-1 monocyte chemoattractant protein-1; CRP C-reactive protein; CI confidence interval
aMean difference in change between groups shows change in control group minus change in intervention group
*Reflects significant differences in mean change between intervention group and control group