Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T06:12:52.278Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Does continuous glucose monitoring influence adherence to time-restricted eating?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 May 2024

J. Tater
Affiliation:
Te Tari Whaiora/Department of Medicine, Te Whare Wānanga o O¯tākou/University of Otago, O¯tepoti/Dunedin, 9016, Aotearoa/New Zealand
M. Roy
Affiliation:
Te Tari Whaiora/Department of Medicine, Te Whare Wānanga o O¯tākou/University of Otago, O¯tepoti/Dunedin, 9016, Aotearoa/New Zealand
R. Taylor
Affiliation:
Te Tari Whaiora/Department of Medicine, Te Whare Wānanga o O¯tākou/University of Otago, O¯tepoti/Dunedin, 9016, Aotearoa/New Zealand
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Obesity is a significant health issue in Aotearoa; effective and pragmatic strategies to facilitate weight loss are urgently required. Growing recognition of the circadian rhythm’s impact on metabolism has popularised diets like time-restricted eating (TRE)(1). The 16:8 TRE method involves limiting food intake to an 8-hour daily eating window and can lead to weight loss without other substantial changes to diet(2). Nonetheless, TRE requires accountability and tolerating hunger for short periods. Continuous glucose monitors (CGM) are small wearable biofeedback devices that measure interstitial glucose levels scanned via smartphones. By providing immediate feedback on the physiological effects of eating and fasting, CGM use may promote adherence to TRE(3). This pilot study aimed to 1) investigate how CGM affects adherence to TRE and 2) assess the feasibility of CGM use while undertaking TRE. This two-arm randomised controlled trial enrolled healthy adults from Dunedin, assigning them to TRE-only or TRE+CGM groups for 14 days. Successful adherence to TRE was defined a priori as maintaining an 8-hour eating window on 80% of days. CGM feasibility was defined a priori as scanning the glucose monitor thrice daily on 80% of days. Secondary outcomes included well-being, anthropometry, glucose levels, and overall TRE and CGM experiences via semi-structured interviews. Twenty-two participants were randomised into two groups: TRE-only (n = 11) and TRE+CGM (n = 11, with n = 2 excluded from analysis post-randomisation for medical reasons). Participants had a diverse range of ethnicities, the mean age was 32 (+/-14.9) years, and 55% were female. The TRE+CGM group adhered to the 8-hour eating window for an average of 10.0 days (range 2-14) compared with 8.6 days (range 2-14) in the TRE-only group. Both groups had similar mean eating window durations of 8.1 hours. Five (56%) participants in the TRE+CGM group achieved the a priori criteria for TRE adherence, compared to 3 (27%) in the TRE-only group. Participants in the TRE+CGM group performed an average of 8.2 (+/-5.6) daily scans, with n = 7 (78%) of participants meeting the a priori CGM feasibility criteria. Neither group reported consistent adverse psychological impacts in DASS-21 and WHO-5 scores. Interviews highlighted that CGM increased hunger tolerance during fasting as participants felt reassured by their normal glucose levels. CGM aided TRE accountability by acting as a biological tracker of food intake. Participants reported that TRE led to improved energy and self-efficacy, a more productive daily routine, and healthier food choices. Promisingly, 72% of participants would use CGM and undertake TRE in future. This study demonstrates that using CGM while undertaking TRE is feasible and can improve adherence by enhancing hunger tolerance and accountability. Overall, participants experienced increased awareness of eating habits and physiological mechanisms. Over the longer term, this simple and synergistic approach may be a helpful weight loss strategy.

Type
Abstract
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Nutrition Society

References

Adafer, R, Messaadi, W, Meddahi, M et al. (2020) Nutrients 12, 3770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowe, DA, Wu, N, Rohdin-Bibby, L et al. (2020) JAMA Intern Med 180, 14911499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hegedus, E, Salvy, SJ, Wee, CP et al. (2021) Obes Res Clin Pract 15, 431438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar