| Literature DB >> 35409921 |
J Javier Perez-Montilla1, Maria Cuevas-Cervera1, Ana Gonzalez-Muñoz2, Maria Carmen Garcia-Rios3, Santiago Navarro-Ledesma1.
Abstract
Evidence shows that the use of food strategies can impact health, but a clear consensus about how the effects of different food strategies impact improvement in the athlete's performance and health remain unclear. This study evaluated how food strategies, specifically intermittent fasting and a ketogenic diet affect health and performance in healthy athletes. Study selection for this review was based on clinical trial studies analyzing changes in performance and health in athletes. The Pubmed, Web of Science, PEDro, Dialnet, Scopus, CINAHL, ProQuest, Medline and Cochrane databases were searched. The Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale, PEDro Internal Validity Scale (IVS) and Standard Quality Assessment Criteria for Evaluating Primary Research Papers from a variety of fields (QUALSYT) checklists were used to evaluate the risk of bias of the included studies. Articles were selected based on criteria concerning the effectiveness of nutritional strategies on athletes' performance; articles should be randomized clinical trials (RCTs) or uncontrolled clinical trials; they should be human studies and they should have been published less than 7 years ago. A total of 15 articles were evaluated, 8 randomised clinical trials and 7 non-randomized clinical studies, with 411 participants who satisfied our inclusion criteria and were included in this review. The results of the study showed intermittent fasting and time-restricted feeding as strategies that produce health benefits. On the other hand, the ketogenic diet did not reach an appropriate consensus. The articles presented a medium level of methodological quality in the PEDro scale, low quality in IVS scale and high quality in QUALSYT scale. Despite the lack of studies analyzing changes in the performance and health of athletes after the use of different nutritional strategies, intermittent fasting and time-restricted feeding should be considered since they seem to be effective, and further studies are necessary.Entities:
Keywords: caloric restriction; fasting; intermittent fasting; ketogenic diet; sport; time-restricted feeding
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35409921 PMCID: PMC8998415 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19074240
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1PRISMA screening process for selection of articles for review.
Methodological assessment with PEDro scale. Articles 1 to 10.
| Item | BinNaharudin et al. (2018) | Carr, | Cheriff et al. (2016) | Chowdhury et al. (2018) | Dethlefsen et al. (2018) | Edinburgh et al. (2019) | Gasmi et al. (2017) | Grant et al. (2017) | Grant et al. (2019) | Gueldich et al. (2019) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| X | X | X | X | X | X | ||||
|
| X | |||||||||
|
| X | X | X | X | X | X | ||||
|
| ||||||||||
|
| X | |||||||||
|
| X | |||||||||
|
| X | X | X | X | X | X | ||||
|
| X | X | X | X | X | |||||
|
| X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | |
|
| X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. The selection criteria were specified. 2. Subjects were randomly assigned to groups. 3. The assignment was hidden. 4. The groups were similar at baseline in relation to the most important prognostic indicators. 5. All subjects were blinded. 6. All therapists who administered the therapy were blinded. 7. All assessors who measured at least one key outcome were blinded. 8. Measures of at least one of the key outcomes were obtained from more than 85% of the subjects initially assigned to the groups. 9. Results were presented for all subjects who received treatment or were assigned to the control group, or where this could not be the case, the data for at least one key outcome were analyzed by ‘intention to treat’. 10. Results of statistical comparisons between groups were reported for at least one key outcome. 11. The study provides point and variability measures for at least one key outcome. Different colors represent the methodological quality of studies with a high (red), or unclear (yellow) or low (green) risk of bias and applicability concerns.
Methodological assessment with PEDro scale. Articles 11 to 21.
| Item | Kysel et al. (2020) | McAllister et al. (2019) | Moro et al. (2016) | Moro et al. (2020) | Shaw et al. (2020) | Sjödin et al. (2020) | Terada et al. (2019) | Vargas et al. (2018) | Vidic’ et al. (2021) | Zajac et al. (2014) | Zinn et al. (2017) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | |
|
| |||||||||||
|
| X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | ||
|
| |||||||||||
|
| X | ||||||||||
|
| X | X | X | X | |||||||
|
| X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | |||
|
| X | X | X | X | X | X | X | ||||
|
| X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | ||
|
| X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. The selection criteria were specified. 2. Subjects were randomly assigned to groups. 3. The assignment was hidden. 4. The groups were similar at baseline in relation to the most important prognostic indicators. 5. All subjects were blinded. 6. All therapists who administered the therapy were blinded. 7. All assessors who measured at least one key outcome were blinded. 8. Measures of at least one of the key outcomes were obtained from more than 85% of the subjects initially assigned to the groups. 9. Results were presented for all subjects who received treatment or were assigned to the control group, or where this could not be the case, the data for at least one key outcome were analyzed by ‘intention to treat’. 10. Results of statistical comparisons between groups were reported for at least one key outcome. 11. The study provides point and variability measures for at least one key outcome. Different colors represent the methodological quality of studies with a high (red), or unclear (yellow) or low (green) risk of bias and applicability concerns.
Assessment of internal quality using IVS scale. Articles 1 to 10.
| Item | BinNaharudin, et al. | Carr et al. (2018) | Cheriff et al. (2016) | Chowdhury et al. (2018) | Dethlefsen et al. (2018) | Edinburgh et al. (2019) | Gasmi et al. (2017) | Grant et al. (2017) | Grant et al. (2019) | Gueldich et al. (2019) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| X | X | X | X | X | X | ||||
|
| X | |||||||||
|
| ||||||||||
|
| X | |||||||||
|
| ||||||||||
|
| X | X | X | X | X | X | X | |||
|
| X | X | X | X | X | |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Different colors represent the methodological quality of studies with a high (red), or unclear (yellow) or low (green) risk of bias and applicability concerns.
Assessment of internal quality using IVS scale. Articles 11 to 21.
| Item | Kysel et al. (2020) | McAllister et al. (2019) | Moro et al. (2016) | Moro et al. (2020) | Shaw et al. (2020) | Sjödin et al. (2020) | Terada et al. (2019) | Vargas et al. (2018) | Vidic´ et al. (2021) | Zajac et al. (2014) | Zinn et al. (2017) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | |
|
| |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||
|
| X | ||||||||||
|
| X | X | X | X | |||||||
|
| X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | |||
|
| X | X | X | X | X | X | X | ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Different colors represent the methodological quality of studies with a high (red), or unclear (yellow) or low (green) risk of bias and applicability concerns.
Methodological assessment using the QUALSYT.
| ITEM | Carr et al. (2018) | Cheriff et al. (2016) | Dethlefsen et al. (2018) | Gueldich et al. (2019) | Shaw et al. (2020) | Zajac et al. (2014) | Zinn et al. (2017) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Yes | Yes | Partial | Partial | Yes | Yes | Parcial |
|
| Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Partial |
|
| Partial | Yes | Yes | Partial | Yes | Partial | Partial |
|
| Yes | Partial | No | Yes | No | Yes | Yes |
|
| No | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
|
| No | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
|
| No | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
|
| Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
|
| Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Partial |
|
| Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
|
| Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Partial |
|
| Yes | Partial | Partial | Yes | Yes | Yes | N/A |
|
| Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
|
| Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. The purpose is specifically explained. 2 The population studied was clearly explained. 3. The participation rate for eligible individuals was at least 50%. 4. All subjects were recruited from the same or similar population. 5. The sample size, a description or estimate of the variance and effect were justified. 6. Exposures of interest were measured before the results were performed. 7. The time period was long enough to reasonably expect to see an association between the exposure and the outcome. 8. The study was examined at different exposure levels with respect to the outcome. 9. Exposure measures were clearly defined, valid, reliable, and consistently implemented in the participants. 10. Exposures were evaluated more than once over time. 11. Outcome measures were clearly defined, valid, reliable, and consistently implemented in the participants. 12. Outcome assessors were blinded to the exposure status of the participants. 13. Loss to follow-up after the start of the study was less than 20%. 14. Key confounders were measured and statistically adjusted for their impact on the exposure–outcome relationship. Different colors represent the methodological quality of studies with a high (red), or unclear (yellow) or low (green) risk of bias and applicability concerns.
Characteristics of the selected studies.
| Name | Type of Study | Sample | Intervention | Measurements | Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BinNaharudin et al. (2018) | RCT | N = 20 men | Both groups had a trial period to get used to the program for 7 days. Every 2 days, they performed the Wingate Test and in the next session, a prolonged high-intensity cycling test, both in a period of 10 days. This period was repeated twice interspersing a 4-week break. | VO2 peak. | From day 4 the intervention decreased their body mass ( |
| Carr et al. (2018) | Non-randomized parallel group study | N = 28 (17 men and 7 women) | All groups followed an intensive supervised training session every day for 3 weeks. | Walking economy. | Within each of the three groups, there was a significant increase in VO2max compared with baseline ( |
| Cherif et al. (2016) | Counterbalanced test | N = 21 men | In both sessions, endurance tests were carried out based on sprint repetitions. | Biomechanical and biochemical markers measured by blood samples and body mass index. | Speed sprint and vertical stiffness declined in the fasting session compared to the control session ( |
| Chowdhury, | RCT | N = 31 (12 men and 19 women) | For 6 weeks: | Body mass | There were no differences between the levels of energy regulation, glycerin, peptides and appetite. |
| Dethlefsen et al. (2018) | Quasi-experimental study | N = 17 men | Both groups fasted for 36 h and samples were taken 2, 12, 24 and 36 h after the last meal. | Amino acid quantification. | Phosphorylation and protein levels of several proteins related to autophagy were higher in the trained group ( |
| Edinburgh et al. (2019) | RCT | N = 12 men | Subjects followed 3 different programs for a 24 h period with 1 week of washout between them: | Blood samples | Participants who fasted before exercise strategy consumed less calories compared to the other strategies ( |
| Gasmi et al. (2017) | RCT | N = 40 men | During the months February, March and April: | Energy (kcal/day) | There was no significant difference in muscular strength in any group. |
| Grant et al. (2017) | RCT | N = 28 men | Both groups performed a resistance training program 3 days/week for 8 weeks. | Body composition. | The values of body composition were lean soft tissue ( |
| Grant et al. (2019) | RCT | N = 40 women | All groups completed an endurance training program for 8 weeks. | Lean mass and fat rates. | Fat rate: statistically significant changes in favor of intervention ( |
| Gueldich et al. (2019) | Quasi-experimental study | N = 10 men | The intervention fasted for a month following the tradition of Ramadan. | Voluntary activation level (VAL). | VAL ( |
| Kysel et al. (2020) | RCT | N = 25 men | During an 8-weekperiod, both groups followed a programmed diet with strength and resistance training. Muscles from chest, back and legs were trained in 3 sessions on 3 different days. Resistance training consisted of a 30 min run at constant heart rate at 70% of maximal heart rate. In addition, the total energy intake of each participant was calculated and reduced by 500kcal per day. | Body composition | Both groups decreased body weight, body fat mass and body mass index. Lean body mass and body water content were significantly reduced by the intervention, while they were not influenced in control group ( |
| McAllister et al. (2019) | Pilot study | N = 26 men | Both groups could only eat in a period of 8 h a day for 28 days. | Blood pressure. | In both groups, body fat and blood pressure decreased ( |
| Moro et al. (2016) | RCT | N = 34 men | Both trained for 8 weeks (3 sessions per week) in a resistance training program. | Height and weight. | Greater decrease in fat ( |
| Moro et al. (2020) | RCT | N = 16 men | Both groups cycled 500 ± 50 km a week divided into 6 weekly cycling sessions for 4 weeks. | Body composition. | Reduction inbody fat in favor of the intervention group ( |
| Shaw et al. (2020) | Cross design | N = 10 men | For 31 days, participants were on a certain diet with a week of interspersed rest. | Blood and saliva samples. | Diets had no significant effects on VO2 peak or exercise tests until exhaustion ( |
| Sjödin et al. (2020) | RCT | N = 24 women | During a 4-week period, each group followed their programmed diet. After the first intervention was complete, a washout period of 15 weeks took place. The groups then interchanged their diets for another 4 weeks. | VO2 max | The first results did not show a significant change in strength and time to fatigue in the intervention group. |
| Terada et al. (2019) | RCT | N = 25 men | Both groups trained 4 weeks (3 sessions/week). Aerobic cycling of maximum intensity. | High intensity aerobic endurance: T85%. | Mean of T85% was longer in the intervention ( |
| Vargas et al. (2018) | RCT | N = 26 men | Participants were organized into 3 groups to participate in the 8-week-long study: | Body composition | There was significant reduction in fat mass and visceral adipose tissue in the ketogenic diet ( |
| Vidic et al. (2021) | RCT | N = 20 men | Subjects participated for 4 weeks in a familiarization program before starting the intervention. Participants were organized into 2 groups: | Bloodsamples | Both groups lost a similar amount of lean body mass and fat mass ( |
| Zajac et al. (2014) | Cross design | N = 8 men | Both groups performed moderate and intense cycling exercises for 3 days preceded by 4 weeks of carrying out the assigned diet. | Biochemical analysis. | High volume training in a ketogenic diet increases fat metabolism during exercise, observable by low triglyceride levels during max effort training and resting ( |
| Zinn et al. (2017) | Pilot study | N = 5 (4 women and 1 man) | The group continued with their usual training and also performed endurance events for 10 weeks. | Sports performance test. | Decreased sports performance, visible by a decrease in time to exhaustion ( |