4.1 Review

The Effects of Intermittent Fasting on Glycemic Control and Body Composition in Adults with Obesity and Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review

期刊

METABOLIC SYNDROME AND RELATED DISORDERS
卷 18, 期 10, 页码 450-461

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/met.2020.0048

关键词

intermittent fasting; type 2 diabetes; glycated hemoglobin a1c; obesity; adults

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of intermittent fasting on glycemic control and body composition in adults with obesity and type 2 diabetes. Although intermittent fasting has shown some promise in improving glucoregulatory indicators and body composition in adults with obesity, there is currently no systematic review evaluating these effects in adults with obesity and type 2 diabetes. A database search of PubMed, CINHAL, and MEDLINE identified five studies that met inclusion criterion. All studies were randomized controlled trials in adult subjects (n = 46-137) with type 2 diabetes and a body mass index of >= 30 kg/m(2). Four different intermittent fasting regimens were reviewed. All fasting regimens revealed strong evidence to support intermittent fasting as a feasible diet to improve glycemia and body composition measures within 12-24 weeks. Follow-up 12-18 months after intermittent fasting did not show promising results for continued weight loss and improved glycemic control. The majority of the studies demonstrated insignificant differences between intermittent fasting and continuous energy restriction for measures of glycated hemoglobin a1c and body composition. More data on intermittent fasting in adults with obesity and type 2 diabetes are needed to determine its benefits within this patient population. Future research should include consistent fasting regimens and larger sample sizes to improve the reliability and generalizability of the data. Also, consistent follow-up after a fasting intervention may enhance long-term benefits and should be considered in future research.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据