Top Links
Journal of Obesity and Overweight
ISSN: 2455-7633
Measure: Multiprofessional Intervention in Overweight and Obesity of Users Assisted in the Primary Health Care
Copyright: © 2018 Laessle R. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Related article at Pubmed, Google Scholar
Obesity has been linked to autonomic dysfunction, which is thought to be one of the main contributors for hypertension, cardiac remodelling and death. The aim of the present study was to investigate stress related changes in autonomous function in subjects at high risk for obesity (Restrained eaters). 33 healthy women aged 18-30 years were recruited through advertisement in local newspapers. Classification in restrained and unrestrained eaters was done according to norm tables from the German version of the Three Factor Eating Questionnaire. Participants were exposed to the Trier Social Stress Test, a standardized laboratory stressor. As an indicator of autonomous function the measurement of heart rate was performed. Restrained eaters did not respond with a significant increase in heart rate after stress. The results are interpreted with respect to consequences for nutritional intake and stress coping.
Keywords: Stress; Heart rate; Obesity; Dietary restraint
Obesity has been linked to autonomic dysfunction, which is thought to be one of the main contributors for hypertension, cardiac remodelling and death. Exercise and diet-based weight loss are the mainstay therapy for obesity, but there is a paucity of data regarding the effect of weight changes in autonomic nervous system activity.
Diet and exercise based weight loss appears to increase parasympathetic and decrease sympathetic activity, the opposing effects being observed with weight gain. These findings are not uniformly reported in the literature, possibly due to differences in study design, methodology, characteristics of the participants and techniques used to estimate autonomic nervous activity [1].
Visona & George [2] reported a significant higher postexercise energy intake in women with high dietary restraint, but did not link their results to alterations in sympathetic activity. Further data of the contribution of alterations in the autonomous nervous system for the control of energy balance are reviewed by Messina et al. [3], who came to the conclusion that a positive energy balance may be a consequence which in turn promotes overweight.
Under normal circumstances sympathetic activity is increased as a consequence of stress. Little is known of this phenomenon in young women characterized by a high degree of dietary restraint, which makes them vulnerable to over eat, when cognitive control has been broken down and a dysregulation of intake may be a consequence. The present study therefore reports on stress induced changes in heart rate as an indicator of sympathetic activity.
33 healthy women aged 18-30 years were recruited through advertisement in local newspapers. Exclusion criteria included oral contraceptive use, smoking, and regular alcohol consumption. To assess the presence of any of these exclusion criteria, participants were examined and interviewed by a physician. All women were paid for participation. Classification in restrained and unrestrained eaters for the present study was done according to norm tables from the German version of the Three Factor Eating Questionnaire [4]. 12 had a low restraint score, 21 were high in dietary restraint. Participants were exposed to the Trier Social Stress Test, a standardized laboratory stressor [5].
Measurement of heart rate was done by Einthoven-II-method with electrodes placed on thorax and forehead. The data were statistically analyzed by MANOVA for repeated measurement.
The table shows the mean stress dependent heart rate for restrained and unrestrained eaters
The stressor lead to a significant increase in heart rate F (1,31) = 29,1, p< .001, but there was no different increase between restrained and unrestrained eaters F (1,31 = .63 p=.43.
Cortisol data for the sample are available from a former study [6], and show lower cortisol after stress for the restrained eaters.
The present study found a significant post stress activation of autonomous function, indicated by heart rate, but no such reaction specifically in restrained eaters.
Our results are in line with the data of [7], who also found lower sympathetic activity after challenge in a sample of adolescents. Women after short term dieting also had reduced autonomous response [8]. In a former study [9] we measured intake characteristics after stress in obese subjects high in dietary restraint. No sympathetic activation was found but restraint was associated to a lack of deceleration of eating rate during a laboratory meal. A reduced autonomous activation after stress may be associated with low coping resources that would be necessary to control intake after stress, and in turn promote obesity [10]. This interpretation is further supported by an investigation of Villada et al. [11] who found an adequate autonomous activation to be essential for constructive coping. The results of the study have to be interpreted under the constraint of several limitations. At the moment the sample size is small. Eating related hormones such as PYY or CCK could not be measured. Due to the necessity of standardization the study was done in the laboratory and therefore a transfer to the natural environment may be questioned.
Although the results have to be regarded as preliminary they suggest an altered autonomous function in restrained eaters associated with a dysregulation of short-term eating behavior that would promote obesity in the long-term.
Variables |
n |
% |
|
Age |
|
|
|
Adults |
05 |
31,25 |
|
Older |
11 |
68,75 |
|
Sex |
|
|
|
Male |
02 |
12,5 |
|
Female |
14 |
87,5 |
|
Profession |
|
|
|
Pensioner |
08 |
50,0 |
|
Industry services |
07 |
43,75 |
|
Home |
01 |
6,25 |
|
Color/race |
|
|
|
Black |
07 |
43,75 |
|
Brown |
08 |
50,0 |
|
Yellow |
01 |
6,25 |
|
Education |
|
|
|
Elementary education |
10 |
62,5 |
|
Full elementary education |
02 |
12,5 |
|
Full time |
02 |
12,5 |
|
Incomplete secondary education |
01 |
6,25 |
|
Post graduation course |
01 |
|
|
Family income |
|
|
|
Between 1 to 2 minimum salary |
15 |
93,75 |
|
From 3 to 4 minimum salary |
01 |
6,25 |
|
Source: research data (2017) Table 1: Socioeconomic and demographic variables of the participants of the Measure Right Program. Diamantina-MG, Brazil, 2016-2017 |
Parameters |
Pre-intervention |
Pos-intervention |
p-value |
|||
|
n |
mean |
n |
mean |
|
|
Weight (kg) |
16 |
67,37 |
16 |
63,56 |
0,0015 |
|
BMI (kg/m2) |
16 |
27,43 |
16 |
27,98 |
0,0043 |
|
CC (cm) |
16 |
89,12 |
16 |
85,72 |
0,0026 |
|
CQ (cm) |
16 |
0,87 |
16 |
0,81 |
0,0018 |
|
RWH (cm) |
16 |
0,76 |
16 |
0,73 |
0,0035 |
|
Source: research data (2017). Legend: BMI: Body Mass Index, CC: circumference of waist, CQ: circumference of hip and RWH: relation waist/hip Table 2: Effect anthropometric parameters of the Measure Right program Diamantina/ MG, Brazil, 2016-2017 |
Food Groups |
Pre intervention |
post intervention |
p-value |
|
Food and beverage |
45,2 |
62,7 |
0,002 |
|
Meat and eggs |
66,5 |
65,8 |
0,0056 |
|
Milk and milk products |
52,8 |
47,3 |
0,0647 |
|
Pasta and tubers |
78,2 |
82,7 |
0,0752 |
|
Desserts |
23,9 |
15,9 |
0,0880 |
|
Fruit |
58,2 |
72,1 |
0,001 |
|
Industrialized |
63,7 |
75,2 |
0,0752 |
|
Oils and fats |
25,1 |
20,9 |
0,001 |
|
Beverages |
33,1 |
31,8 |
0,0528 |
|
Cereals and grains |
69,5 |
72,9 |
0,0679 |
|
Source: research data (2017). Table 3: Frequency of daily consumption of food groups, adults and the elderly. Diamantina/MG, 2016-17 |
Questions |
Before (%) |
After (%) |
|
What is healthy eating for you? Answer: natural, rich in FVG |
77,7 |
100 |
|
Do you think your food is healthy? |
Yes: 55 No 44 |
Yes: 77,7 No: 22,2 |
|
Name 2 healthy food eat every day |
Rice and beans: 38,8 Meat and FLG: 27,7 |
Rice and beans: 33,3 Meat and FLG: 66,6 |
|
What is unhealthy eating for you? |
Excessive mass: 33,3 |
Fat, salt, sugar and industrialized: 66,6 |
|
Name 2 unhealthy foods that you eat every day? |
Carbohydrates: 11 |
Not as: 38.8% Industrialized: 11.1 |
|
What is excess weight for you? |
Weight above normal: 39 Do not diet and AF: 16.6 Harmful to health: 16.6 |
Weight above normal: 55.5 Harmful to health: 44.4 |
|
What causes you to be overweight? |
Do not diet and AF: 77.7 Anxiety: 5.55 |
Do not diet and AF: 77.7 Anxiety: 5.55 |
|
What could be done to lose weight? |
Diet and FT: 94.4 |
Diet and FT: 94.4 |
|
What is harder for you in order to lose weight? |
Do not do FT and Diet: 72.2 |
Do not do FT and Diet: 72.2 |
|
Source: research data (2017). Legend: FLG: fruits, vegetables and greens, FT: physical training Table 4: Knowledge about diet and nutrition of the participants of the Measure Right program (n = 16), Diamantina / MG, Brazil, 2016-2017 |