Consistency in compensatory eating responses following acute exercise in inactive, overweight and obese women.
Consistency in compensatory eating responses following acute exercise in inactive, overweight and obese women.
复制标题
不活跃、超重和肥胖女性急性运动后补偿性饮食反应的一致性。
DOI：
10.1017/s000711451500046x
复制
发表时间：
2015
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Wing,RenaR
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Unick,JessicaL;O'Leary,KevinC;Dorfman,Leah;Thomas,JGraham;Strohacker,Kelley;Wing,RenaR
人们通常认为，一些人在运动后可靠地增加能量摄入（EI）（“补偿者”），而另一些人则没有（“非补偿者”），这导致研究人员研究区分这两组的特征。然而，目前尚不清楚运动后的EI是否随时间推移而稳定。本研究探讨是否补偿性饮食反应，一个单一的运动回合是一致的个人在三对试验。身体不活跃的超重/肥胖女性（n 28，BMI 30·3（sd 2·9）kg/m2）参加了三对测试阶段，每对包括运动（30分钟中等强度步行）和休息测试日。运动/休息后1小时使用自助餐测量EI。对于每一对，计算EI的差异（EIdiff= EIex-EIrest），其中EIex是运动阶段的EI，EIrest是休息阶段的EI，女性被分为“补偿者”（EIex>EIrest）或“非补偿者”（EIex≤ EIrest）。运动日平均EI为3328·0（sd 1686·2）kJ，与休息日平均EI为3269·4（sd 1582·4）kJ相似（P= 0·67）。虽然在三个休息日内，EI在个体内是可靠的，（组内相关系数（ICC）0.75，95%CI 0.60，0.87; P<0.001）和3个运动日（ICC 0·83，95% CI 0·70，0·91; P< 0·001），三对试验中EIdiff的ICC较低（ICC 0·20，95% CI − 0·02，0·45; P= 0·04），表明运动后的补偿性进食不是一个稳定的结构。此外，“补偿者”/“非补偿者”的分类并不可靠（κ =-0.048; P= 0.66）。当使用“相对”EI时，结果没有改变，该EI考虑了运动/休息期间的能量消耗。急性代偿性EI运动回合后是不可靠的超重妇女。试图了解是什么区分“补偿者”和“非补偿者”的基础上，一个单一的饮食活动后的运动是不合理的。
It is often assumed that some individuals reliably increase energy intake (EI) post-exercise (‘compensators’) and some do not (‘non-compensators’), leading researchers to examine the characteristics that distinguish these two groups. However, it is unclear whether EI post-exercise is stable over time. The present study examined whether compensatory eating responses to a single exercise bout are consistent within individuals across three pairs of trials. Physically inactive, overweight/obese women (n 28, BMI 30·3 (sd 2·9) kg/m2) participated in three pairs of testing sessions, with each pair consisting of an exercise (30 min of moderate-intensity walking) and resting testing day. EI was measured using a buffet meal 1 h post-exercise/rest. For each pair, the difference in EI (EIdiff= EIex− EIrest) was calculated, where EIex is the EI of the exercise session and EIrest is the EI of the resting session, and women were classified as a ‘compensator’ (EIex>EIrest) or ‘non-compensator’ (EIex≤ EIrest). The average EI on exercise days (3328·0 (sd 1686·2) kJ) was similar to those on resting days (3269·4 (sd 1582·4) kJ) (P= 0·67). Although EI was reliable within individuals across the three resting days (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) 0·75, 95 % CI 0·60, 0·87; P< 0·001) and three exercise days (ICC 0·83, 95 % CI 0·70, 0·91; P< 0·001), the ICC for EIdiff across the three pairs of trials was low (ICC 0·20, 95 % CI − 0·02, 0·45; P= 0·04), suggesting that compensatory eating post-exercise is not a stable construct. Moreover, the classification of ‘compensators’/‘non-compensators’ was not reliable (κ =− 0·048; P= 0·66). The results were unaltered when ‘relative’ EI was used, which considers the energy expenditure of the exercise/resting sessions. Acute compensatory EI following an exercise bout is not reliable in overweight women. Seeking to understand what distinguishes ‘compensators’ from ‘non-compensators’ based on a single eating episode post-exercise is not justified.