The effect of the macrobiotic Ma-Pi 2 diet vs. the recommended diet in the management of type 2 diabetes: the randomized controlled MADIAB trial.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Diet is an important component of type 2 diabetes therapy. Low adherence to current therapeutic diets points out to the need for alternative dietary approaches. This study evaluated the effect of a different dietary approach, the macrobiotic Ma-Pi 2 diet, and compared it with standard diets recommended for patients with type 2 diabetes.Methods
A randomized, controlled, open-label, 21-day trial was undertaken in patients with type 2 diabetes comparing the Ma-Pi 2 diet with standard (control) diet recommended by professional societies for treatment of type 2 diabetes. Changes in fasting blood glucose (FBG) and post-prandial blood glucose (PPBG) were primary outcomes. HbA1c, insulin resistance (IR), lipid panel and anthropometrics were secondary outcomes.Results
After correcting for age, gender, BMI at baseline, and physical activity, there was a significantly greater reduction in the primary outcomes FBG (95% CI: 1.79; 13.46) and PPBG (95% CI: 5.39; 31.44) in those patients receiving the Ma-Pi 2 diet compared with those receiving the control diet. Statistically significantly greater reductions in the secondary outcomes, HbA1c (95% CI: 1.28; 5.46), insulin resistance, total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol and LDL/HDL ratio, BMI, body weight, waist and hip circumference were also found in the Ma-Pi 2 diet group compared with the control diet group. The latter group had a significantly greater reduction of triglycerides compared with the Ma-Pi 2 diet group.Conclusions
Intervention with a short-term Ma-Pi 2 diet resulted in significantly greater improvements in metabolic control in patients with type 2 diabetes compared with intervention with standard diets recommended for these patients.Trial registration
Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN10467793.
SUBMITTER: Soare A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4190933 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Inflammation underlies a variety of chronic medical conditions, including diabetes. The anti-inflammatory diet, one that excludes foods that may stimulate inflammation and includes foods that reduce inflammation, may improve inflammatory biomarkers in people with diabetes and pre-diabetes. Thirty participants with diabetes or pre-diabetes were randomized (2:1) in a controlled feeding study that compared the anti-inflammatory diet (n=20) to a control diet (n=10) based on the American Diabetes Association recommendations. Diets were matched for protein, carbohydrate, fat, and fiber content as closely as possible. Participants were fed an isocaloric diet for 2 weeks, followed by continued ad libitum feeding in their dietary group assignment for an additional 4 weeks. All meals were prepared by the study team. Primary outcomes included inflammatory markers, including cytokines and hsCRP. Secondary outcomes included body weight and biomarkers for cardiovascular disease and diabetes. Both diets resulted in trends in reduced markers of inflammation, especially with weight loss. In addition, glucose, lipids, and triglycerides all trended downward, also non-significantly and equally in both groups. Dietary change can improve inflammation as well as other cardiometabolic risk factors. In this study, the anti-inflammatory diet did not affect markers of inflammation more than the control diet.
| S-EPMC6550471 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The gut microbiota exerts a role in type 2 diabetes (T2D), and deviations from a mutualistic ecosystem layout are considered a key environmental factor contributing to the disease. Thus, the possibility of improving metabolic control in T2D by correcting gut microbiome dysbioses through diet has been evaluated. Here, we explore the potential of two different energy-restricted dietary approaches - the fibre-rich macrobiotic Ma-Pi 2 diet or a control diet recommended by Italian professional societies for T2D treatment - to correct gut microbiota dysbioses in T2D patients. In a previous 21-d open-label MADIAB trial, fifty-six overweight T2D patients were randomised to the Ma-Pi 2 or the control diet. For the present study, stools were collected before and after intervention from a subset of forty MADIAB participants, allowing us to characterise the gut microbiota by 16S rRNA sequencing and imputed metagenomics. To highlight microbiota dysbioses in T2D, the gut microbiota of thirteen normal-weight healthy controls were characterised. According to our findings, both diets were effective in modulating gut microbiome dysbioses in T2D, resulting in an increase of the ecosystem diversity and supporting the recovery of a balanced community of health-promoting SCFA producers, such as Faecalibacterium, Roseburia, Lachnospira, Bacteroides and Akkermansia. The Ma-Pi 2 diet, but not the control diet, was also effective in counteracting the increase of possible pro-inflammatory groups, such as Collinsella and Streptococcus, in the gut ecosystem, showing the potential to reverse pro-inflammatory dysbioses in T2D, and possibly explaining the greater efficacy in improving the metabolic control.
| S-EPMC4894062 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Incentives play a role in introducing health-related benefits, but no interventions using mixed incentives, i.e. a combination of individual and group incentives, have been tested in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). We evaluated the feasibility of implementing individual- and mixed-incentives, with and without a supportive partner, on glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) control and weight loss among patients with T2DM. Methods: This is a feasibility, sex-stratified, single-blinded, randomized controlled study in individuals with T2DM. All participants received diabetes education and tailored goal setting for weight and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c). Participants were randomly assigned into three arms: individual incentives (Arm 1), mixed incentives-altruism (Arm 2), and mixed incentives-cooperation (Arm 3). Participants were accompanied by a diabetes educator every other week to monitor targets, and the intervention period lasted 3 months. The primary outcome was the change in HbA1c at 3 months from baseline. Weight and change body mass index (BMI) were considered as secondary outcomes. Results: Out of 783 patients screened, a total of 54 participants, 18 per study arm, were enrolled and 44 (82%) completed the 3-month follow-up. Mean baseline HbA1c values were 8.5%, 7.9% and 8.2% in Arm 1, Arm 2, and Arm 3, respectively. At 3 months, participants in all three study arms showed reductions in HbA1c ranging from -0.9% in Arm 2 to -1.4% in Arm 1. Weight and BMI also showed reductions. Conclusions: Individual and mixed cash incentives show important reductions in HbA1c, weight and BMI in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus after 3 months. Recruitment and uptake of the intervention were successfully accomplished demonstrating feasibility to conduct larger effectiveness studies to test individual and mixed economic incentives for diabetes management. Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02891382.
| S-EPMC6325609 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe role of mobile health care (mHealth) in glycemic control has been investigated, but its impact on self-management skills and its psychological aspects have not been studied.ObjectiveWe evaluated the efficacy of mHealth-based diabetes self-management education and the effect of voluntary participation on its effects.MethodsThis study was a randomized controlled open-label trial conducted for 6 months at Kangbuk Samsung Hospital. Participants in the control group (n=31) maintained their previous diabetes management strategies. Participants in the intervention group (n=41) additionally received mHealth-based diabetes self-management education through a mobile app and regular individualized feedback from health care professionals. The primary outcome was change in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level over 6 months between the 2 groups (intervention versus control) and within each group (at 6 months versus baseline). The secondary outcomes were changes in body mass index, blood pressure, lipid profile, and questionnaire scores (the Korean version of the Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities Questionnaire, an Audit of Diabetes Dependent Quality of Life, the Appraisal of Diabetes Scale, and Problem Areas in Diabetes) over 6 months between groups and within each group.ResultsA total of 66 participants completed this study. HbA1c (P=.04), total cholesterol level (P=.04), and Problem Areas in Diabetes scores (P=.02) significantly decreased; total diet (P=.03) and self-monitoring of blood glucose level scores (P=.01), based on the Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities Questionnaire, markedly increased within the intervention group. These significant changes were observed in self-motivated participants who were recruited voluntarily via advertisements.ConclusionsmHealth-based diabetes self-management education was effective at improving glycemic control and diabetes self-management skills and lowering diabetes-related distress in voluntary participants.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03468283; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03468283.
| S-EPMC7532462 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:Diabetes is a substantial public health issue. Peer mentoring is a low-cost intervention for improving glycemic control in patients with diabetes. However, long-term effects of peer mentoring and creation of sustainable models are not well studied. Objective:Assess the effects of a peer support intervention for improving glycemic control in patients with diabetes and evaluate a model in which former mentees serve as mentors. Design, Setting, and Participants:A randomized clinical trial was conducted from September 27, 2012, to March 21, 2018, at the Corporal Michael J. Crescenz Medical Center. US veterans with type 2 diabetes aged 30 to 75 years with hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c) greater than 8% received support over 6 months from peers with prior poor glycemic control but who had achieved HbA1c less than or equal to 7.5% (phase 1). Phase 1 mentees were then randomized to become a mentor or not to new randomly assigned participants in phase 2. Outcomes were assessed at 6 and 12 months. Data were analyzed from October 5, 2016, to September 4, 2018. Interventions:Mentors who received an initial training session and monthly reinforcement training were assigned 1 mentee and given $20 for each month they contacted their mentee at least weekly. Main Outcomes and Measures:Primary outcome was HbA1c change at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included HbA1c change at 12 months and change in low-density lipoprotein, blood pressure, diabetes quality of life, and depression symptoms at 6 and 12 months. Results:The study enrolled 365 participants into phase 1 and 122 participants into phase 2. Most participants were Black (341 [66%]) and male (454 [96%]), with a mean (SD) age of 60 (7.5) years. Mean phase 1 HbA1c change at 6 months for usual care was -0.20% (95% CI, -0.46% to 0.06%) vs -0.52% (95% CI, -0.76% to -0.29%) for mentees (P?=?.06). Mean phase 2 HbA1c change at 6 months for usual care was -0.46% (95% CI, -1.02% to 0.10%) vs 0.08% (95% CI, -0.42% to 0.57%) for mentees (P?=?.16). There were no differences in secondary outcomes or HbA1c levels at 12 months. There was no benefit to past mentees who became mentors. Conclusions and Relevance:In this randomized clinical trial, a peer mentor intervention did not improve 6-month HbA1c levels and did not have sustained benefits. Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01651117.
| S-EPMC7489832 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:We previously reported that a weight-maintenance diet with a carbohydrate:protein:fat ratio of 30:30:40%, ingested for 5 weeks, improved blood glucose control in subjects with untreated type 2 diabetes. In this study we also determined that insulin and insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I) were increased. In this report we provide further information. Specifically, 24-hour total and individual amino acids, glucagon and cortisol data are provided. In addition, we determined whether these multiple effectors resulted in a positive nitrogen balance and an increase in fat-free mass. Insulin and IGF-I should stimulate protein accumulation. An increase in amino acids, particularly branched chain amino acids, should facilitate this, whereas glucagon and cortisol could have adverse effects in this regard. METHODS:Eight men with untreated type 2 diabetes were studied. A randomized crossover design was used. Data were obtained before and after 5 weeks on a control diet (55% carbohydrate:15% protein:30% fat) and on a 30% carbohydrate:30% protein:40% fat diet. Nitrogen balance and body composition were determined at the beginning and end of each dietary intervention. RESULTS:As expected, the mean 24-hour total amino acid area response was higher after ingesting the 30:30:40 diet. However, the increase was only statistically significant for the branched chain amino acids, and phenylalanine and tyrosine. The 24-hour cortisol profile was unchanged. Glucagon was increased. Nitrogen balance was positive. Body weight was stable. Body composition and computed tomography data indicate no change in the fat-free mass. CONCLUSION:This high protein, low carbohydrate diet induced a metabolic milieu which strongly favors a positive protein balance, and a positive balance was present. However, an increase in lean (protein) mass was not documented. Whether such a diet in people with type 2 diabetes is useful in preventing or delaying the loss of total lean body mass and/or sarcopenia associated with aging remains to be determined.
| S-EPMC3443440 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Rationale: Sepsis patients suffer from severe metabolic and immunologic dysfunction that may be amplified by standard carbohydrate-based nutritional regimes. We therefore hypothesize that a ketogenic diet improves sepsis treatment. Objectives: We investigated the safety and feasibility of a ketogenic diet in sepsis patients. Methods: We conducted a monocentric open-labeled randomized controlled trial (DRKS00017710) enrolling adult sepsis patients randomly assigned to either ketogenic or standard high-carbohydrate diet for 14 days with follow-up until day 30. The primary outcome measure was β-hydroxybutyrate serum concentration on day 14. Secondary outcomes included safety, clinical and immunological changes. Measurements and Main Results: 40 critically ill septic patients were assigned to the study groups. Increase in β-hydroxybutyrate concentrations from baseline to day 14 was markedly greater under ketogenic diet (1.2 ±0.9) compared to controls (-0.3 ±0.4); estimated mean difference 1.4 (95%-CI 1.0-1.8; p<0.0001). During ketogenic diet, no patient required insulin treatment beyond day 4, whereas 35% to 60% of control patients did (p=0.0095). Metabolic side effects were not observed under ketogenic diet. Ventilation-free (IRR 1.7; 95%-CI: 1.5 to 2.1; p<0.0001), vasopressor-free (IRR 1.7; 95%-CI: 1.5 to 2.0; p<0.0001), dialysis-free (IRR 1.5; 95%-CI: 1.3 to 1.8; p<0.0001), and ICU-free days (IRR 1.7; 95%-CI: 1.4 to 2.1; p<0.0001) significantly increased in patients under ketogenic diet. There was no difference in 30-day mortality. Analyses indicated favorable changes towards immune homeostasis. Conclusions: Ketogenic diet is a feasible and safe nutritional regimen in septic patients promoting recovery from sepsis-related organ dysfunction and could become a new tool in modern treatment concepts.
2024-06-13 | PXD046061 | Pride
Project description:Background and aimsCompared with self-prepared LRD, a prepackaged low-residue diet (LRD) can improve patient compliance, but whether it can further improve the quality of bowel preparation is uncertain. The study aimed to compare the application of the prepackaged formula LRD with self-prepared LRD in bowel preparation for colonoscopy.MethodsA multicenter randomized controlled trial was conducted in 15 centers. The eligible subjects were randomly assigned to one of two groups: the formula LRD group and the self-prepared LRD group. On the day before the colonoscopy, subjects in the self-prepared LRD group were instructed to consume a restricted LRD prepared by themselves, while subjects in the formula LRD group were given six bags of prepackaged formula LRD and instructed to consume them according to their individual need. The primary outcome was an adequate bowel preparation rate. Secondary outcomes mainly included Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) scores, dietary restriction compliance rate, tolerance, satisfaction, adenoma detection rate (ADR), and adverse reactions. The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under the identifier NCT03943758.ResultsA total of 550 subjects were recruited. Compared with the self-prepared LRD group, the formula LRD group showed a higher adequate bowel preparation rate (94.5 vs. 80.4%; P < 0.01), BBPS scores (7.87 ± 1.13 vs. 6.75 ± 1.47; P < 0.01), dietary compliance rate (92.4 vs. 78.9%; P < 0.01), tolerance (P < 0.01 in degree of hunger, intensity of physical strength, and negative influence on daily activities), satisfaction (8.56 ± 1.61 vs. 7.20 ± 2.02; P < 0.01), and ADR (25.6 vs. 16.0%; P < 0.01). There was no significant difference in adverse reactions.ConclusionCompared with self-prepared LRD, the formula LRD showed similar safety and higher bowel preparation quality, compliance, and tolerance in bowel preparation. More formula LRDs could be designed according to different dietary habits and ethnic populations, and further researches are warranted to confirm their effect.Clinical trial registrationhttps://register.clinicaltrials.gov, identifier: NCT03943758.
| S-EPMC10079983 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe study's objective was to assess the effects of automated telephone outreach with speech recognition (ATO-SR) on diabetes-related testing.Research design and methodsWe identified 1,200 health plan members who were overdue for diabetes-related testing and randomly allocated 600 to ATO-SR and 600 to usual care (no intervention). The intervention included three interactive calls encouraging recommended testing. The primary outcome was retinopathy testing, since this was the health plan's principal goal. Tests for glycemia, hyperlipidemia, and nephropathy were secondary outcomes.ResultsIn total, 232 participants (39%) verbally responded to the calls. There was no difference between the intervention and the usual care groups in the primary outcome (adjusted hazard ratio 0.93 [95% CI 0.71-1.22]) and no effect of the intervention on any of the secondary outcomes.ConclusionsFewer than 40% of the patients randomized to ATO-SR interacted verbally with the system. The intervention had no effect on the study's outcomes.
| S-EPMC2890338 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe availability of smartphone health apps empowers people to manage their own health. Currently, there are over 300,000 health apps available in the market targeting a variety of user needs from weight loss to management of chronic conditions, with diabetes being the most commonly targeted condition. To date, health apps largely fall outside government regulation, and there are no official guidelines to help clinicians and patients in app selection. Patients commonly resort to the internet for suggestions on which diabetes app to use.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to investigate apps identified through a Google search and characterize these apps in terms of features that support diabetes management.MethodsWe performed a Google search for the "best diabetes apps 2017" and explored the first 4 search results. We identified and compiled a list of the apps recommended in the returned search results, which were Web articles. Information about each app was extracted from the papers and corresponding app store descriptions. We examined the apps for the following diabetes management features: medication management, blood glucose self-management, physical activity, diet and nutrition, and weight management.ResultsOverall, 26 apps were recommended in 4 papers. One app was listed in all 4 papers, and 3 apps appeared on 3 of the 4 lists. Apart from one paper, there were no explicit criteria to justify or explain the selection of apps. We found a wide variation in the type and the number of diabetes management features in the recommended apps. Five apps required payment to be used. Two-thirds of the apps had blood glucose management features, and less than half had medication management features. The most prevalent app features were nutrition or diet-related (19/24, 79%) and physical activity tracking (14/24, 58%).ConclusionsThe ambiguity of app selection and the wide variability in key features of the apps recommended for diabetes management may pose difficulties for patients when selecting the most appropriate app. It is critical to involve patients, clinicians, relevant professional bodies, and policy makers to define the key features an app should have for it to be classified as a "diabetes management" app. The lessons learned here may be extrapolated for the development and recommendation of apps for the management of other chronic conditions.
| S-EPMC6352016 | biostudies-literature