Dietary weight loss and exercise interventions effects on quality of life in overweight/obese postmenopausal women: a randomized controlled trial

Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchison Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA. .
International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity (Impact Factor: 3.68). 10/2011; 8:118. DOI: 10.1186/1479-5868-8-118
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Although lifestyle interventions targeting multiple lifestyle behaviors are more effective in preventing unhealthy weight gain and chronic diseases than intervening on a single behavior, few studies have compared individual and combined effects of diet and/or exercise interventions on health-related quality of life (HRQOL). In addition, the mechanisms of how these lifestyle interventions affect HRQOL are unknown. The primary aim of this study was to examine the individual and combined effects of dietary weight loss and/or exercise interventions on HRQOL and psychosocial factors (depression, anxiety, stress, social support). The secondary aim was to investigate predictors of changes in HRQOL.
This study was a randomized controlled trial. Overweight/obese postmenopausal women were randomly assigned to 12 months of dietary weight loss (n = 118), moderate-to-vigorous aerobic exercise (225 minutes/week, n = 117), combined diet and exercise (n = 117), or control (n = 87). Demographic, health and anthropometric information, aerobic fitness, HRQOL (SF-36), stress (Perceived Stress Scale), depression [Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI)-18], anxiety (BSI-18) and social support (Medical Outcome Study Social Support Survey) were assessed at baseline and 12 months. The 12-month changes in HRQOL and psychosocial factors were compared using analysis of covariance, adjusting for baseline scores. Multiple regression was used to assess predictors of changes in HRQOL.
Twelve-month changes in HRQOL and psychosocial factors differed by intervention group. The combined diet + exercise group improved 4 aspects of HRQOL (physical functioning, role-physical, vitality, and mental health), and stress (p ≤ 0.01 vs. controls). The diet group increased vitality score (p < 0.01 vs. control), while HRQOL did not change differently in the exercise group compared with controls. However, regardless of intervention group, weight loss predicted increased physical functioning, role-physical, vitality, and mental health, while increased aerobic fitness predicted improved physical functioning. Positive changes in depression, stress, and social support were independently associated with increased HRQOL, after adjusting for changes in weight and aerobic fitness.
A combined diet and exercise intervention has positive effects on HRQOL and psychological health, which may be greater than that from exercise or diet alone. Improvements in weight, aerobic fitness and psychosocial factors may mediate intervention effects on HRQOL.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The increase of non-communicable diseases at all ages has fostered the general concern for sustaining population health worldwide. Unhealthy lifestyles and dietary habits impacting physical and psycho-social health are well known risk factors for developing life threatening diseases. Identifying the determinants of quality of life is an important task from a Public Health perspective. Consumer-Reported Outcome measures of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) are becoming increasingly necessary and relevant in the field of nutrition. However, quality of life questionnaires are seldom used in the nutrition field. We conducted a scientific literature search to find out the questionnaires used to determine the association between dietary habits and quality of life. A total of 13 studies were eligible for inclusion. Across these studies the short form-36, a generic (non-disease specific) HRQoL measurement instrument was the most widely used. However, generic measures may have limited content validity in the context of dietary habits interventions. We recommend additional contextual diet-specific HRQoL measures are also needed for evaluating the impact of diet habits on daily life functioning and well-being.
    Frontiers in Pharmacology 05/2015; 6. DOI:10.3389/fphar.2015.00101
  • Source
    Frontiers in Physiology 01/2013; 4:346. DOI:10.3389/fphys.2013.00346
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To examine the effects of aerobic exercise therapy on quality of life (QoL) and associated outcomes in women treated for breast cancer. Evidence suggests that exercise may be beneficial, but no trial has included an exercise-placebo and a usual-care group to control for the attention effects that might be associated with aerobic exercise interventions in cancer patients. A total of 108 women who had been treated for breast cancer 12 to 36 months previously were randomly assigned to supervised aerobic exercise therapy (n = 34), exercise-placebo (body conditioning; n = 36), or usual care (n = 38). Exercise therapy and exercise-placebo sessions took place three times per week for 8 weeks. Outcomes included QoL, depression, exercise behavior, aerobic fitness; outcomes were assessed at baseline and at the 8- and 24-week follow-up. Analyses of covariance revealed a significant mean difference of 9.8 units in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (primary outcome) favoring aerobic exercise therapy at 8 weeks, relative to usual care. Significant differences that favored aerobic exercise therapy relative to usual care were recorded for Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast, social/family well-being, functional well-being, and breast cancer subscale scores at 8-week follow-up. Psychological health outcomes improved modestly for both intervention groups; these improvements were sustained for several end points. Exercise therapy had large, clinically meaningful, short-term beneficial effects on QoL in women treated for breast cancer; this finding cannot be attributable to attention, given that the exercise-placebo group did not report similar effects relative to usual care.
    Journal of Clinical Oncology 06/2007; 25(13):1713-21. DOI:10.1200/JCO.2006.09.5083 · 17.88 Impact Factor

Preview (2 Sources)

Available from