z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Randomized clinical trial of standard dietary treatment versus a low‐carbohydrate/high‐protein diet or the LighterLife Programme in the management of obesity *
Author(s) -
ROLLAND Catherine,
HESSION Michelle,
MURRAY Susan,
WISE Alan,
BROOM Iain
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
journal of diabetes
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.949
H-Index - 43
eISSN - 1753-0407
pISSN - 1753-0393
DOI - 10.1111/j.1753-0407.2009.00033.x
Subject(s) - medicine , weight loss , obesity , body mass index , calorie , blood pressure , randomized controlled trial , endocrinology , gastroenterology
Background:  With the current obesity epidemic, the search for effective weight loss approaches is required. In the present study, changes in weight, body composition and cardiovascular (CV) risk in response to a low‐fat, reduced‐energy diet (LFRE), a low‐carbohydrate/high‐protein diet (LCHP), or a commercially available very low‐calorie diet (LighterLife; LL) were assessed. Methods:  One hundred and twenty obese patients (body mass index ≥35 kg/m 2 ) underwent a screening period of 3 months on the LFRE. Those who lost >5% of their body weight were maintained on this approach for an additional 3 months, whereas those who lost >10% at this time were maintained for 1 year. Patients failing to achieve these targets were randomly allocated to either the LCHP ( n  =   38) or LL ( n  =   34) for a period of 9 months. Results:  Significantly greater weight loss was seen for patients on the LL than the LCHP at 3 (mean (±SD) −11.6 ± 12.9 vs −2.8 ± 4.5 kg, respectively; P  <   0.0001) and 9 months (−15.1 ± 21.1 vs −1.9 ± 5.0 kg, respectively; P  <   0.0001) after screening. Significantly greater improvement in total cholesterol, low‐density lipoprotein–cholesterol, fasting glucose, and diastolic blood pressure was seen at 3 months in patients on the LL compared with the LCHP ( P  <   0.05). These differences were no longer significant at 9 months, with the exception of fasting glucose. The attrition rate was elevated in the LCHP group, but did not differ significantly from the LL group. Conclusion:  Greater weight loss and improved CV risk were achieved with the LL, which mostly reflects the patient support provided for each dietary treatment.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here