Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-fvjsw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-13T20:50:45.396Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Short-term appetite control in response to a 6-week exercise programme in sedentary volunteers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 May 2007

Catia Martins
Affiliation:
Division of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food Science, School of Biomedical and Molecular Sciences, University of Surrey Guildford, Surrey GU2 7XH UK
Helen Truby
Affiliation:
Division of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food Science, School of Biomedical and Molecular Sciences, University of Surrey Guildford, Surrey GU2 7XH UK
Linda M. Morgan*
Affiliation:
Division of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food Science, School of Biomedical and Molecular Sciences, University of Surrey Guildford, Surrey GU2 7XH UK
*
*Corresponding author:Dr L. M. Morgan, fax +44 1483 686401, email l.morgan@surrey.ac.uk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Previous cross-sectional studies have shown that sedentary males, unlike their active counterparts, are unable to compensate for previous energy intake (EI). The present study therefore investigated the effects of a 6-week moderate exercise programme (4 times per week, 65–75 % maximal heart rate) on appetite regulation in healthy sedentary volunteers using a longitudinal design. EI at a buffet meal 60 min after high-energy (HEP; 607 kcal) and low-energy (LEP; 246 kcal) preloads, together with 24 h cumulative EI, were measured in twenty-five healthy volunteers (eleven men; mean age 30 (SD 12) years, mean BMI 22·7 (SD 2·3) kg/m2), at baseline and after the exercise intervention. Subjective hunger and fullness were assessed throughout using visual analogue scales. ANOVA showed a significant preload ×  exercise interaction on 24 h cumulative EI, supporting an improvement in appetite control over this time period with the exercise programme. There was a trend towards improvement in energy compensation over the same period (8·9 (SD 118·5) % v. 79·5 (SD 146.·4) %; P = 0·056). No preload ×  exercise interaction was observed for buffet EI. Secondary analysis, however, showed that although buffet EI after the two preloads was not significantly different at baseline, buffet EI after the HEP was significantly lower than after the LEP following the exercise intervention. The improvement in short-term appetite control with exercise was not explained by changes in subjective hunger or satiety. This longitudinal study supports the original cross-sectional findings and suggests that exercise may have a significant impact on short-term appetite control by leading to a more sensitive eating behaviour in response to previous EI. Further studies are needed to clarify the mechanisms involved.

Information

Type
Full Papers
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2007
Figure 0

Table 1Ingredients and nutritional composition of the preloads

Figure 1

Table 2Anthropometry, fitness levels and metabolic profile at baseline and at the end of the study in all participants (n 25), men (n 11) and women (n 14). Results expressed as mean ± sd

Figure 2

Fig. 1Cumulative EI after the high-energy (HEP; □) and low-energy (LEP; ) preload, at baseline and at the end of the study. Mean values with their standard errors for twenty-five participants (eleven men and fourteen women). ANOVA showed significance for exercise ×  preload interaction (P = 0·023), but no significant main effects of exercise or preload or an exercise ×  preload ×  gender interaction. Mean values were significantly different between conditions: **P < 0·01.

Figure 3

Fig. 2Energy intake (kcal) at the buffet lunch after the high-energy (HEP; □) and low-energy (LEP; ) preload, at baseline and end of the study. Mean values with their standard errors for twenty-five participants (eleven men and fourteen women). ANOVA showed a significant effect of preload (P < 0·0001) but no significant effect of exercise, preload ×  exercise or preload ×  exercise ×  gender interaction. Mean values were significantly different between conditions: **P < 0·01, †P < 0·0001 (assuming α < 0·01 to correct for multiple comparisons).

Figure 4

Table 3Subjective ratings of hunger (cm) at intervals before and after high- (HEP) and low-energy (LEP) preload consumption, at baseline and at the end of the study, in all participants (n 25), men (n 11) and women (n 14)

Figure 5

Table 4Subjective ratings of fullness (cm) at intervals before and after high- (HEP) and low-energy (LEP) preload consumption, at baseline and at the end of the study, in all participants (n 25), men (n 11) and women (n 14)