Impact of intermittent vs. continuous energy restriction on weight and cardiometabolic factors: a 12-month follow-up.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Intermittent energy restriction continues to gain popularity as a weight loss strategy; however, data assessing it's long-term viability is limited. The objective of this study was to follow up with participants 12 months after they had completed a 12-month dietary intervention trial involving continuous energy restriction and two forms of intermittent energy restriction; a week-on-week-off energy restriction and a 5:2 programme, assessing long-term changes on weight, body composition, blood lipids and glucose. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: 109 overweight and obese adults, aged 18-72 years, attended a 12-month follow-up after completing a 12-month dietary intervention involving three groups: continuous energy restriction (1000 kcal/day for women and 1200 kcal/day for men), week-on-week-off energy restriction (alternating between the same energy restriction as the continuous group for one week and one week of habitual diet), or 5:2 (500 kcal/day on modified fast days each week for women and 600 kcal/day for men). The primary outcome was weight change at 24 months from baseline, with secondary outcomes of change in body composition, blood lipids and glucose. RESULTS: For the 109 individuals who completed the 12-month follow-up (82 female, 15 male, mean BMI 33 kg/m2), weight decreased over time with no differences between week-on and week-off and continuous energy restriction or 5:2 and continuous energy restriction with -4.5 ± 4.9 kg for continuous energy restriction, -2.8 ± 6.5 kg for week-on, week-off and -3.5 ± 5.1 kg for 5:2. Total cholesterol reduced over time and glucose, HDL, LDL and triglycerides were unchanged. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Intermittent energy restriction was as successful in achieving modest weight loss over a 24-month period as continuous energy restriction.

Effect of intermittent compared to continuous energy restriction on weight loss and weight maintenance after 12 months in healthy overweight or obese adults.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Intermittent energy restriction (IER) is an alternative to continuous energy restriction (CER) for weight loss. There are few long-term trials comparing efficacy of these methods. The objective was to compare the effects of CER to two forms of IER; a week-on-week-off energy restriction and a 5:2 program, during which participants restricted their energy intake severely for 2 days and ate as usual for 5 days, on weight loss, body composition, blood lipids, and glucose. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A one-year randomized parallel trial was conducted at the University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia. Participants were 332 overweight and obese adults, ages 18-72 years, who were randomized to 1 of 3 groups: CER (4200 kJ/day for women and 5040 kJ/day for men), week-on-week-off energy restriction (alternating between the same energy restriction as the continuous group for one week and one week of habitual diet), or 5:2 (2100 kJ/day on modified fast days each week for women and 2520 kJ/day for men, the 2 days of energy restriction could be consecutive or non-consecutive). Primary outcome was weight loss, and secondary outcomes were changes in body composition, blood lipids, and glucose. RESULTS: For the 146 individuals who completed the study (124 female, 22 male, mean BMI 33 kg/m2) mean weight loss, and body fat loss at 12 months was similar in the three intervention groups, -6.6 kg for CER, -5.1 kg for the week-on, week-off and -5.0 kg for 5:2 (p = 0.2 time by diet). Discontinuation rates were not different (p = 0.4). HDL-cholesterol rose (7%) and triglycerides decreased (13%) at 12 months with no differences between groups. No changes were seen for fasting glucose or LDL-cholesterol. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The two forms of IER were not statistically different for weight loss, body composition, and cardiometabolic risk factors compared to CER.

Correction: Effect of intermittent compared to continuous energy restriction on weight loss and weight maintenance after 12 months in healthy overweight or obese adults.

Table 4 is still missing from both versions. It was labeled Table 3 in the first version but a reviewer wanted an extra table in the methods which became Table 1.