Effects of eating with an augmented fork with vibrotactile feedback on eating rate and body weight: a randomized controlled trial.


Journal

The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity
ISSN: 1479-5868
Titre abrégé: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101217089

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
22 10 2019
Historique:
received: 08 03 2019
accepted: 09 10 2019
entrez: 24 10 2019
pubmed: 24 10 2019
medline: 13 2 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Eating rate is a basic determinant of appetite regulation: people who eat more slowly feel sated earlier and eat less. A high eating rate contributes to overeating and potentially to weight gain. Previous studies showed that an augmented fork that delivers real-time feedback on eating rate is a potentially effective intervention to decrease eating rate in naturalistic settings. This study assessed the impact of using the augmented fork during a 15-week period on eating rate and body weight. In a parallel randomized controlled trial, 141 participants with overweight (age: 49.2 ± 12.3 y; BMI: 31.5 ± 4.48 kg/m2) were randomized to intervention groups (VFC, n = 51 or VFC+, n = 44) or control group (NFC, n = 46). First, we measured bite rate and success ratio on five consecutive days with the augmented fork without feedback (T1). The intervention groups (VFC, VFC+) then used the same fork, but now received vibrotactile feedback when they ate more than one bite per 10 s. Participants in VFC+ had additional access to a web portal with visual feedback. In the control group (NFC), participants ate with the fork without either feedback. The intervention period lasted four weeks, followed by a week of measurements only (T2) and another measurement week after eight weeks (T3). Body weight was assessed at T1, T2, and T3. Participants in VFC and VFC+ had a lower bite rate (p < .01) and higher success ratio (p < .0001) than those in NFC at T2. This effect persisted at T3. In both intervention groups participants lost more weight than those in the control group at T2 (p < .02), with no rebound at T3. The findings of this study indicate that an augmented fork with vibrotactile feedback is a viable tool to reduce eating rate in naturalistic settings. Further investigation may confirm that the augmented fork could support long-term weight loss strategies. The research reported in this manuscript was registered on 4 November 2015 in the Netherlands Trial Register with number NL5432 ( https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/5432 ).

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Eating rate is a basic determinant of appetite regulation: people who eat more slowly feel sated earlier and eat less. A high eating rate contributes to overeating and potentially to weight gain. Previous studies showed that an augmented fork that delivers real-time feedback on eating rate is a potentially effective intervention to decrease eating rate in naturalistic settings. This study assessed the impact of using the augmented fork during a 15-week period on eating rate and body weight.
METHODS
In a parallel randomized controlled trial, 141 participants with overweight (age: 49.2 ± 12.3 y; BMI: 31.5 ± 4.48 kg/m2) were randomized to intervention groups (VFC, n = 51 or VFC+, n = 44) or control group (NFC, n = 46). First, we measured bite rate and success ratio on five consecutive days with the augmented fork without feedback (T1). The intervention groups (VFC, VFC+) then used the same fork, but now received vibrotactile feedback when they ate more than one bite per 10 s. Participants in VFC+ had additional access to a web portal with visual feedback. In the control group (NFC), participants ate with the fork without either feedback. The intervention period lasted four weeks, followed by a week of measurements only (T2) and another measurement week after eight weeks (T3). Body weight was assessed at T1, T2, and T3.
RESULTS
Participants in VFC and VFC+ had a lower bite rate (p < .01) and higher success ratio (p < .0001) than those in NFC at T2. This effect persisted at T3. In both intervention groups participants lost more weight than those in the control group at T2 (p < .02), with no rebound at T3.
CONCLUSIONS
The findings of this study indicate that an augmented fork with vibrotactile feedback is a viable tool to reduce eating rate in naturalistic settings. Further investigation may confirm that the augmented fork could support long-term weight loss strategies.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
The research reported in this manuscript was registered on 4 November 2015 in the Netherlands Trial Register with number NL5432 ( https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/5432 ).

Identifiants

pubmed: 31640791
doi: 10.1186/s12966-019-0857-7
pii: 10.1186/s12966-019-0857-7
pmc: PMC6805487
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Randomized Controlled Trial Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

90

Références

PLoS One. 2013;8(1):e53288
pubmed: 23372657
J Acad Nutr Diet. 2016 Jul;116(7):1066-8
pubmed: 26785908
BMJ. 2009 Jan 05;340:b5388
pubmed: 20051465
Appetite. 2013 Mar;62:91-5
pubmed: 23207188
Nutrients. 2017 Aug 17;9(8):null
pubmed: 28817066
Behav Neurosci. 2013 Dec;127(6):878-89
pubmed: 24341712
Br J Nutr. 2009 Oct;102(7):1091-7
pubmed: 19356272
J Nutr. 2011 Dec;141(12):2242-8
pubmed: 22049294
Am J Clin Nutr. 2014 Jul;100(1):123-51
pubmed: 24847856
J Appl Psychol. 2011 Sep;96(5):1076-86
pubmed: 21463017
Appetite. 2018 Jun 1;125:253-269
pubmed: 29408331
Prev Med. 2015 Nov;80:50-2
pubmed: 25818810
Appetite. 2014 Dec;83:19-25
pubmed: 25086209
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2010 Jan;95(1):333-7
pubmed: 19875483
Am J Clin Nutr. 2009 Mar;89(3):794-800
pubmed: 19144727
Am J Clin Nutr. 2008 Dec;88(6):1560-6
pubmed: 19064516
Appetite. 2017 Jun 1;113:7-13
pubmed: 28192220
Psychol Bull. 1992 Jul;112(1):155-9
pubmed: 19565683

Auteurs

Sander Hermsen (S)

Utrecht University of Applied Sciences, Utrecht, NL, Netherlands.

Monica Mars (M)

Division of Human Nutrition, Wageningen University, Wageningen, NL, Netherlands.

Suzanne Higgs (S)

School of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.

Jeana H Frost (JH)

VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, NL, Netherlands.

Roel C J Hermans (RCJ)

NUTRIM School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht University, PO BOX 616, 6200, MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands. r.hermans@maastrichtuniversity.nl.
Behavioural Science Institute, Radboud University, Nijmegen, NL, Netherlands. r.hermans@maastrichtuniversity.nl.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH