Protein Supplementation May Dampen Positive Effects of Exercise on Glucose Homeostasis: A Pilot Weight Loss Intervention.

BACKGROUND: The role of protein in glucose homeostasis has demonstrated conflicting results. However, little research exists on its impact following weight loss. This study examined the impact of protein supplementation on glucose homeostasis in older adults >65 years with obesity seeking to lose weight. METHODS: A 12-week, nonrandomized, parallel group intervention of protein (PG) and nonprotein (NPG) arms for 28 older rural adults (body mass index (BMI) ≥ 30 kg/m2) was conducted at a community aging center. Both groups received twice weekly physical therapist-led group strength training classes. The PG consumed a whey protein supplement three times per week, post-strength training. Primary outcomes included pre/post-fasting glucose, insulin, inflammatory markers, and homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR). RESULTS: Mean age and baseline BMI were 72.9 ± 4.4 years and 37.6 ± 6.9 kg/m2 in the PG and 73.0 ± 6.3 and 36.6 ± 5.5 kg/m2 in the NPG, respectively. Mean weight loss was -3.45 ± 2.86 kg in the PG and -5.79 ± 3.08 kg in the NPG (p < 0.001). There was a smaller decrease in pre- vs. post-fasting glucose levels (PG: -4 mg ± 13.9 vs. NPG: -12.2 ± 25.8 mg/dL; p = 0.10), insulin (-7.92 ± 28.08 vs. -46.7 ± 60.8 pmol/L; p = 0.01), and HOMA-IR (-0.18 ± 0.64 vs. -1.08 ± 1.50; p = 0.02) in the PG compared to the NPG. CONCLUSIONS: Protein supplementation during weight loss demonstrated a smaller decrease in insulin resistance compared to the NPG, suggesting protein may potentially mitigate beneficial effects of exercise on glucose homeostasis.

Association between cervical artery dissection and spinal manipulative therapy -a medicare claims analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cervical artery dissection and subsequent ischemic stroke is the most serious safety concern associated with cervical spinal manipulation. METHODS: We evaluated the association between cervical spinal manipulation and cervical artery dissection among older Medicare beneficiaries in the United States. We employed case-control and case-crossover designs in the analysis of claims data for individuals aged 65+, continuously enrolled in Medicare Part A (covering hospitalizations) and Part B (covering outpatient encounters) for at least two consecutive years during 2007-2015. The primary exposure was cervical spinal manipulation; the secondary exposure was a clinical encounter for evaluation and management for neck pain or headache. We created a 3-level categorical variable, (1) any cervical spinal manipulation, 2) evaluation and management but no cervical spinal manipulation and (3) neither cervical spinal manipulation nor evaluation and management. The primary outcomes were occurrence of cervical artery dissection, either (1) vertebral artery dissection or (2) carotid artery dissection. The cases had a new primary diagnosis on at least one inpatient hospital claim or primary/secondary diagnosis for outpatient claims on at least two separate days. Cases were compared to 3 different control groups: (1) matched population controls having at least one claim in the same year as the case; (2) ischemic stroke controls without cervical artery dissection; and (3) case-crossover analysis comparing cases to themselves in the time period 6-7 months prior to their cervical artery dissection. We made each comparison across three different time frames: up to (1) 7 days; (2) 14 days; and (3) 30 days prior to index event. RESULTS: The odds of cervical spinal manipulation versus evaluation and management did not significantly differ between vertebral artery dissection cases and any of the control groups at any of the timepoints (ORs 0.84 to 1.88; p > 0.05). Results for carotid artery dissection cases were similar. CONCLUSION: Among Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 and older who received cervical spinal manipulation, the risk of cervical artery dissection is no greater than that among control groups.

Impact of whey protein supplementation in a weight-loss intervention in rural dwelling adults: A feasibility study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Weight loss in older adults enhances physical function, but may lead to sarcopenia and osteoporosis. Whey protein is a low cost rich source of essential amino acids, may improve physical function. We evaluated the feasibility and acceptability of consuming whey protein in the context of a weight-loss intervention in older adults with obesity. METHODS: A 12-week pilot feasibility, non-randomized weight loss study of 28 older adults was conducted, consisting of individualized, weekly dietitian visits with twice weekly physical therapist-led group strengthening classes. Half consumed whey protein, three times weekly, following exercise. Preliminary efficacy measures of body composition, sit-to-stand, 6-min walk and grip strength and subjective measures of self-reported health and function were also evaluated. RESULTS: Of the 37 enrolled, 28 completed the study (50 % in the protein group). Attendance rates for protein vs. non-protein groups were 89.9 ± 11.1 % vs. 95.6 ± 3.4 % (p = 0.08). Protein consumption was high in those attending classes (90.3 %) as was compliance at home (82.6 %). Whey was pleasant (67.3 ± 22.1, range 30-100, above average), had little aftertaste, and was neither salty or sticky. All were compliant (0.64 ± 0.84, range 0-5, low = higher compliance). Both groups lost significant weight (protein vs. no protein, -3.45 ± 2.86 vs. -5.79 ± 3.08, p = 0.47); Sit-to-stand, 6-min walk, and gait speed were no different, grip strength was improved in the protein compared to the non-protein group (-2.63 kg vs. 4.29 kg; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that whey protein is a low-cost and readily available nutritional supplement that can be integrated into a weight loss intervention.

Temporal Trends and Geographic Variations in the Supply of Clinicians Who Provide Spinal Manipulation to Medicare Beneficiaries: A Serial Cross-Sectional Study.

OBJECTIVE: Spinal manipulation (SM) is recommended for first-line treatment of patients with low back pain. Inadequate access to SM may result in inequitable spine care for older US adults, but the supply of clinicians who provide SM under Medicare is uncertain. The purpose of this study was to measure temporal trends and geographic variations in the supply of clinicians who provide SM to Medicare beneficiaries. METHODS: Medicare is a US government-administered health insurance program that provides coverage primarily for older adults and people with disabilities. We used a serial cross-sectional design to examine Medicare administrative data from 2007 to 2015 for SM services identified by procedure code. We identified unique providers by National Provider Identifier and distinguished between chiropractors and other specialties by Physician Specialty Code. We calculated supply as the number of providers per 100 000 beneficiaries, stratified by geographic location and year. RESULTS: Of all clinicians who provide SM to Medicare beneficiaries, 97% to 98% are doctors of chiropractic. The geographic supply of doctors of chiropractic providing SM services in 2015 ranged from 20/100 000 in the District of Columbia to 260/100 000 in North Dakota. The supply of other specialists performing the same services ranged from fewer than 1/100 000 in 11 states to 8/100 000 in Colorado. Nationally, the number of Medicare-active chiropractors declined from 47 102 in 2007 to 45 543 in 2015. The count of other clinicians providing SM rose from 700 in 2007 to 1441 in 2015. CONCLUSION: Chiropractors constitute the vast majority of clinicians who bill for SM services to Medicare beneficiaries. The supply of Medicare-active SM providers varies widely by state. The overall supply of SM providers under Medicare is declining, while the supply of nonchiropractors who provide SM is growing.