想要高效减肥?试试隔日禁食(荟萃分析)
创作:RZN 审核:RZN 2022年11月20日
  • 纳入2011-2021年间,24项研究(共1768名参与者)进行荟萃分析,比较不同间歇性禁食(IF)的减肥效果,并将其与传统卡路里能量限制(CER)进行比较;
  • 隔日禁食(ADF)、5:2饮食和限时饮食(TRE)都能有效减肥,使体重在2至52周内减轻1%至13%;
  • IF和CER的减肥效果没有显著差异,ADF/MADF在减肥方面排名最高,其次是CER,然后是TRE,5:2饮食没有明确结论;
  • 治疗开始时,每个方案的依从性都居于中高水平,但随着时间的推移,依从性下降。
主编推荐语
RZN
隔日禁食、5:2饮食和限时饮食是间歇性禁食的三种主要形式,能有效减肥,但将其与传统的卡路里能量限制进行比较时,过往研究并不能得出孰优孰劣的定论。瑞士雀巢健康科学研究院在Obesity上发表最新研究,采用随机效应网络分析得知,隔日禁食(或改良版)在减肥效果上排名最高,其次是卡路里能量限制和限时饮食。因此,间歇性禁食可以作为减肥的替代策略,以适应个人的特定需求和接受度。
关键字
延伸阅读本研究的原文信息和链接出处,以及相关解读和评论文章。欢迎读者朋友们推荐!
图片
Obesity [IF:9.298]

A meta-analysis comparing the effectiveness of alternate day fasting, the 5:2 diet, and time-restricted eating for weight loss

一项meta分析比较了隔日禁食、5:2饮食和限时饮食对减肥的效果

10.1002/oby.23568

2022-11-08, Systemic Review & Meta-analysis

Abstract & Authors:展开

Abstract:收起
Objective: The objective of this meta-analysis was to compare the effectiveness of different intermittent fasting (IF) regimens on weight loss, in the general population, and compare these to traditional caloric energy restriction (CER).
Methods: Three databases were searched from 2011 to June 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed weight loss and IF, including alternate day fasting (ADF), the 5:2 diet, and time-restricted eating (TRE). A random effect network analysis was used to compare the effectiveness between the three regimens. Meta-regression analysis was presented as weighted mean differences of body weight loss.
Results: The exploratory random effects network analysis of 24 RCTs (n = 1768) ranked ADF as the most effective, followed by CER and TRE. The meta-analysis showed that IF regimens resulted in similar weight loss to CER (mean difference 0.26 kg, 95% CI: –0.31 to 0.84; p = 0.37). Compliance was generally high (>80%) in trials shorter than 3 months.
Conclusions: The present meta-analysis concludes that IF is comparable to CER and a promising alternative for weight loss. Among the three regimens, ADF showed the highest effectiveness for weight loss, followed by CER and TRE. Further well-powered RCTs with longer durations of intervention are required to draw solid conclusions.

First Authors:
Paloma Elortegui Pascual

Correspondence Authors:
Paloma Elortegui Pascual

All Authors:
Paloma Elortegui Pascual,Maryann R Rolands,Alison L Eldridge,Amira Kassis,Fabio Mainardi,Kim-Anne Lê,Leonidas G Karagounis,Philipp Gut,Krista A Varady

评论