Cargando…

A systematic review and meta‐analysis of the effectiveness of meal replacements for weight loss

Meal replacements (MR) are generally not recommended in clinical guidelines for the management of obesity. The aim of this review is to provide an up‐to‐date systematic evaluation of the effect of weight loss interventions incorporating MR compared with alternative interventions on weight change at...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Astbury, Nerys M., Piernas, Carmen, Hartmann‐Boyce, Jamie, Lapworth, Sophia, Aveyard, Paul, Jebb, Susan A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6849863/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30675990
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/obr.12816
_version_ 1783469296425369600
author Astbury, Nerys M.
Piernas, Carmen
Hartmann‐Boyce, Jamie
Lapworth, Sophia
Aveyard, Paul
Jebb, Susan A.
author_facet Astbury, Nerys M.
Piernas, Carmen
Hartmann‐Boyce, Jamie
Lapworth, Sophia
Aveyard, Paul
Jebb, Susan A.
author_sort Astbury, Nerys M.
collection PubMed
description Meal replacements (MR) are generally not recommended in clinical guidelines for the management of obesity. The aim of this review is to provide an up‐to‐date systematic evaluation of the effect of weight loss interventions incorporating MR compared with alternative interventions on weight change at 1 year in adults with overweight or obesity. Six electronic databases were searched from inception to the end of August 2018 for randomized controlled trials comparing the effect of MR with interventions that did not include MR on weight at 1 year. We excluded studies using diets providing <3347 kJ/(800 kcal)/day and those which used total diet replacement (TDR) from this review. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Twenty‐three studies with 7884 adult participants were included. Six out of 23 studies were judged at low risk of bias across all domains, and 5/23 studies were judged at high risk of bias in at least one domain. Studies with similar intervention and comparators were grouped into five comparisons for analysis. Mean weight change at 1 year favoured the MR group relative to the control group in each comparison. In those comparisons where we conducted meta‐analysis, in people assigned to a diet incorporating MR, mean difference was −1.44 kg (−2.48 to −0.39 kg; I (2) = 38%) compared with alternative kinds of diets. In those assigned to a MR diet along with support, mean difference was −2.22 kg (−3.99 to −0.45, I (2) = 81%) compared with other diets with support and −3.87 kg (−7.34 to −0.40; I (2) = 60%) compared with other kinds of diet without support. In those assigned a MR diet with an enhanced level of support, mean difference was −6.13 kg (−7.35 to −4.91, I (2) = 19%) compared with alternative diets and regular support. Programmes incorporating meal replacements led to greater weight loss at 1 year than comparator weight loss programmes and should be considered as a valid option for management of overweight and obesity in community and health care settings.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6849863
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68498632019-11-15 A systematic review and meta‐analysis of the effectiveness of meal replacements for weight loss Astbury, Nerys M. Piernas, Carmen Hartmann‐Boyce, Jamie Lapworth, Sophia Aveyard, Paul Jebb, Susan A. Obes Rev Obesity Treatment Meal replacements (MR) are generally not recommended in clinical guidelines for the management of obesity. The aim of this review is to provide an up‐to‐date systematic evaluation of the effect of weight loss interventions incorporating MR compared with alternative interventions on weight change at 1 year in adults with overweight or obesity. Six electronic databases were searched from inception to the end of August 2018 for randomized controlled trials comparing the effect of MR with interventions that did not include MR on weight at 1 year. We excluded studies using diets providing <3347 kJ/(800 kcal)/day and those which used total diet replacement (TDR) from this review. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Twenty‐three studies with 7884 adult participants were included. Six out of 23 studies were judged at low risk of bias across all domains, and 5/23 studies were judged at high risk of bias in at least one domain. Studies with similar intervention and comparators were grouped into five comparisons for analysis. Mean weight change at 1 year favoured the MR group relative to the control group in each comparison. In those comparisons where we conducted meta‐analysis, in people assigned to a diet incorporating MR, mean difference was −1.44 kg (−2.48 to −0.39 kg; I (2) = 38%) compared with alternative kinds of diets. In those assigned to a MR diet along with support, mean difference was −2.22 kg (−3.99 to −0.45, I (2) = 81%) compared with other diets with support and −3.87 kg (−7.34 to −0.40; I (2) = 60%) compared with other kinds of diet without support. In those assigned a MR diet with an enhanced level of support, mean difference was −6.13 kg (−7.35 to −4.91, I (2) = 19%) compared with alternative diets and regular support. Programmes incorporating meal replacements led to greater weight loss at 1 year than comparator weight loss programmes and should be considered as a valid option for management of overweight and obesity in community and health care settings. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-01-24 2019-04 /pmc/articles/PMC6849863/ /pubmed/30675990 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/obr.12816 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Obesity Reviews published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of World Obesity Federation This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Obesity Treatment
Astbury, Nerys M.
Piernas, Carmen
Hartmann‐Boyce, Jamie
Lapworth, Sophia
Aveyard, Paul
Jebb, Susan A.
A systematic review and meta‐analysis of the effectiveness of meal replacements for weight loss
title A systematic review and meta‐analysis of the effectiveness of meal replacements for weight loss
title_full A systematic review and meta‐analysis of the effectiveness of meal replacements for weight loss
title_fullStr A systematic review and meta‐analysis of the effectiveness of meal replacements for weight loss
title_full_unstemmed A systematic review and meta‐analysis of the effectiveness of meal replacements for weight loss
title_short A systematic review and meta‐analysis of the effectiveness of meal replacements for weight loss
title_sort systematic review and meta‐analysis of the effectiveness of meal replacements for weight loss
topic Obesity Treatment
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6849863/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30675990
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/obr.12816
work_keys_str_mv AT astburynerysm asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisoftheeffectivenessofmealreplacementsforweightloss
AT piernascarmen asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisoftheeffectivenessofmealreplacementsforweightloss
AT hartmannboycejamie asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisoftheeffectivenessofmealreplacementsforweightloss
AT lapworthsophia asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisoftheeffectivenessofmealreplacementsforweightloss
AT aveyardpaul asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisoftheeffectivenessofmealreplacementsforweightloss
AT jebbsusana asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisoftheeffectivenessofmealreplacementsforweightloss
AT astburynerysm systematicreviewandmetaanalysisoftheeffectivenessofmealreplacementsforweightloss
AT piernascarmen systematicreviewandmetaanalysisoftheeffectivenessofmealreplacementsforweightloss
AT hartmannboycejamie systematicreviewandmetaanalysisoftheeffectivenessofmealreplacementsforweightloss
AT lapworthsophia systematicreviewandmetaanalysisoftheeffectivenessofmealreplacementsforweightloss
AT aveyardpaul systematicreviewandmetaanalysisoftheeffectivenessofmealreplacementsforweightloss
AT jebbsusana systematicreviewandmetaanalysisoftheeffectivenessofmealreplacementsforweightloss