Article

Influence of Weekend Lifestyle Patterns on Body Weight

Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.
Obesity (Impact Factor: 4.39). 06/2008; 16(8):1826-30. DOI: 10.1038/oby.2008.320
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To determine whether alterations in diet and/or activity patterns during weekends contribute to weight gain or hinder weight loss.
Randomized, controlled trial comparing 1 year of caloric restriction (CR) with 1 year of daily exercise (EX). Subjects included 48 healthy adults (30F, 18M) aged 50-60 years with BMI 23.5-29.9 kg/m(2). Body weight was measured on 7 consecutive mornings for a total of 165 weeks at baseline and 437 weeks during the 1-year interventions. Daily weight changes were calculated for weekends (Friday to Monday) and weekdays (Monday to Friday). Daily energy intake was estimated using food diaries; daily physical activity was measured using accelerometers. Both measures were validated against doubly labeled water (DLW).
At baseline, participants consistently gained weight on weekend days (+0.06 +/- 0.03 kg/day, (mean +/- s.e.), P = 0.02), but not on weekdays (-0.02 +/- 0.02 kg/day, P = 0.18). This was attributable to higher dietary intake on Saturdays and lower physical activity on Sundays relative to weekdays (both P < 0.05). During the interventions, both CR and EX participants were in negative energy balance on weekdays (P < 0.005). On weekends, however, CR participants stopped losing weight, and EX participants gained weight (+0.08 +/- 0.03 kg/day, P < 0.0001) due to higher dietary intakes on weekends. This helps to explain the slower-than-expected rate of weight loss during the interventions.
Alterations in lifestyle behaviors on weekends contribute to weight gain or cessation of weight loss on weekends. These results provide one explanation for the relatively slow rates of weight loss observed in many studies, and the difficulty with maintaining significant weight loss.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Susan B Racette, Aug 10, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
102 Views
  • Source
    • "Study or Subgroup Elley 2003 King 2007 Lawton 2008 Martinson 2010 McTiernan 2007 Opdenacker 2008 Racette 2008 van Keulen 2011 van Stralen 2010 Werkman 2010 Yates 2009 "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Retirement represents a major transitional life stage in middle to older age. Changes in physical activity typically accompany this transition, which has significant consequences for health and well-being. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the evidence for the effect of interventions to promote physical activity in adults aged 55 to 70 years, focusing on studies that reported long-term effectiveness. This systematic review adheres to a registered protocol (PROSPERO CRD42011001459). Methods Randomized controlled trials of interventions to promote physical activity behavior with a mean/median sample age of 55 to 70 years, published between 2000 and 2010, were identified. Only trials reporting the long-term effect (≥ 12 months) on objective or self-reported physical activity behavior were included. Trials reporting physiological proxy measures of physical activity were excluded. Meta-analyses were conducted when trials provided sufficient data and sensitivity analyses were conducted to identify potential confounding effects of trials of poor methodological quality or with attrition rates ≥ 30%. Results Of 17,859 publications identified, 32 were included which reported on 21 individual trials. The majority of interventions were multimodal and provided physical activity and lifestyle counselling. Interventions to promote physical activity were effective at 12 months (standardized mean difference (SMD) = 1.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.16 to 1.99, pedometer step-count, approximating to an increase of 2,197 steps per day; SMD = 0.19, 95% CI = 0.10 to 0.28, self-reported physical activity duration outcome), but not at 24 months based on a small subset of trials. There was no evidence for a relationship between intervention effectiveness and mode of delivery or number of intervention contacts; however, interventions which involved individually tailoring with personalized activity goals or provision of information about local opportunities in the environment may be more effective. Conclusions Interventions in adults aged 55 to 70 years led to long term improvements in physical activity at 12 months; however, maintenance beyond this is unclear. Identified physical activity improvements are likely to have substantial health benefits in reducing the risk of age-related illnesses. These findings have important implications for community-based public health interventions in and around the retirement transition.
    BMC Medicine 03/2013; 11(1):75. DOI:10.1186/1741-7015-11-75 · 7.28 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "The fact that the records were not completed for 50 consecutive days means that we were not able to observe if food choices on the previous day(s) influenced the decisions an individual made about eating and drinking on subsequent days. Research indicates that people do tend to alter lifestyle behaviour on weekends leading to overall higher dietary intake from Friday to Sunday (Haines, Hama, Guilkey, & Popkin, 2003; Raclette et al., 2008), which may be followed by an attempt to 'be good' Monday through Thursday. The proposed time-series perspective to food choice behaviour is interesting but has not received attention in the literature, possibly due to lack of suitable data. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Despite a wide range of research approaches already being used to study eating and drinking, this complex aspect of human activity lacks conceptualisation and methodology for structured description of food choices. This paper introduces a metaphoric framework--the food choice kaleidoscope--as an approach to such inquiry. It conceptualises individual food choice events (or eating occasions) as being shaped by three main factors--product, person and place--and provides a descriptive approach through which patterns and variability in food choice events can be observed. The factors can be studied separately or in combination to reveal the joint influence of product, place and/or person factors. The approach is 'data hungry' and requires information about large numbers of eating occasions obtained for a variety of foods/beverage in a variety of situations. Using information about ∼5800 eating occasions obtained from 25 New Zealand women who self-completed 24-h recall diaries, the kaleidoscopic approach is illustrated. The data are analysed in relation to 30 food/beverage categories and 37 contextual (or 'place') variables, and at the level of individual participants. Results are presented that document: product-to-product variability in who eats/drinks what and where/how it is consumed; place-to-place variation in what is consumed and by whom; and person-to-person variability in what is consumed and where/how it is consumed. The most significant insight to emerge is the considerable heterogeneity that is hidden beneath the average patterns, and that average values may be inappropriate/irrelevant for this type of data.
    Appetite 04/2011; 56(2):412-23. DOI:10.1016/j.appet.2011.01.012 · 2.69 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The energy balance equation has served as an important tool for the study of bioenergetics. It is based on one of the most fundamental properties of thermodynamics and has been invaluable in understanding the interactions of energy intake, energy expenditure, and body composition. Recently, however, the obesity epidemic has extended the use of the equation to the creation of public health messages for preventing or even reversing secular trends in body mass index. This usage often fails to consider how changes in any one term of the equation can lead to accommodations in one or both of the other two terms. It is concluded that research and public health messages should not simply consider how interventions affect just energy expenditure or energy intake, but rather how they affect the balance or gap between energy intake and expenditure.
    Nutrition Reviews 06/2009; 67(5):249-54. DOI:10.1111/j.1753-4887.2009.00197.x · 5.54 Impact Factor
Show more