Our office will remain closed through Friday, September 18th as we continue to assess the damages caused by Hurricane Sally. ActiGraph team members are working remotely, however shipping delays should be expected at this time. We expect to resume regular business hours on Monday, September 21st. If you need immediate assistance, please contact us by email at email@example.com and we will respond as quickly as possible. Thank you for your continued support.
Energy Intake, Non-exercise Physical Activity And Successful Weight Loss: The Midwest Exercise Trial-2 (met- 2)
- Presented on May 29, 2013
Changes in energy intake (EI) or non-exercise physical activity (NEPA) may affect the weight loss response to aerobic exercise training.
Purpose To evaluate differences in EI and NEPA between responders (RS; weight loss ≥ 5%) and non-responders (NR; weight loss < 5%) performing 10 months of supervised aerobic exercise training.
Methods Seventy-four overweight/obese (BMI 25-39.9) sedentary young adults (18-30 years) completed a 10-month trial (i.e., ≥ 90% scheduled exercise sessions) of treadmill exercise (5 d.wk-1,70-80% max heart rate, supervised ≥4 d.wk-1) at either 2,000 (n = 37; 19 females) or 3,000 (n = 37; 18 females) kcal.wk-1. EI (kcal.d-1) was measured by picture-plate-waste and NEPA (min.d-1 of sedentary and moderate-tovigorous activity [MVPA]) were assessed by Actigraph GT1M accelerometer over 7 consecutive days at baseline, and at months 3.5, 7, and 10. Participants were instructed to maintain baseline EI and NEPA during the 10 month intervention. T-tests for independent samples and Chi-Squares were used to assess statistical significance.
Results Mean weight change was -9.1 ± 3.7% and -0.7 ± 2.7% for RS and NR, respectively (p < 0.01). There were no significant baseline differences (p = 0.17) in EI (kcal.d-1) between RS (2817 ± 645) and NR (3036 ± 694). However, EI (kcal.d-1) during the intervention was significantly higher (p = 0.02) in NR (3065 ± 805) compared with RS (2669 ± 650). There were no significant differences (p > 0.05) between RS and NR for NEPA (min.day-1) at baseline for either sedentary time (sedentary: RS = 604 ± 81, NR = 600 ± 101) or time spent in MVPA (MVPA: RS = 35 ± 17, NR = 40 ± 24), or during the 10 month intervention (sedentary: RS = 572 ± 63, NR = 571 ± 98), (MVPA: RS = 37 ± 11, NR = 36 ± 12). The proportion of participants classified as RS or NR did not differ by gender (χ2 (1) = 0.10, p = 0.75) or intervention group (2,000 kcal.wk-1 vs. 3,000 kcal.wk-1; χ2 (1) = 1.96, p = 0.16).
Conclusions These results suggest that overweight and obese young adults who fail to achieve clinically significant weight loss (≥ 5%) in response to aerobic exercise training had a higher EI throughout the study than RS while NEPA remains unchanged in both groups. This may support targeting a modest EI deficit (~300-500 kcal.d-1) in exercise NR.
Supported by NIH R01 DK49181