Graduate Thesis Or Dissertation


Changes in body composition and metabolic syndrome risk factors : response to energy-restriction, protein intake, and high intensity interval training Public Deposited

Downloadable Content

Download PDF


Attribute NameValues
  • Metabolic syndrome (MetS) and abdominal obesity (AbOb) increase the risk of developing cardiovascular disease and diabetes. Energy restriction (ER), highprotein (PRO) intake and high-intensity interval training (HIT) can independently improve MetS and AbOb. However, ER reduces metabolically active lean body mass (LBM) in addition to body fat (BF). Purpose: To determine the effects of a 16-wk ER diet with 2 levels of PRO (15% or 25% of energy), plus HIT, on MetS risk factors, AbOb, and body composition in women. Methods: Sedentary, premenopausal women (age=35±10y) with AbOb (waist circumference [WC] ≥80cm) were randomized to a 16-wk ER diet (-300kcals/d) with 15% (15PRO; n=17) or 25% (25PRO; n=18) of energy from PRO, plus 45min/d, 3d/wk HIT and 45min/d, 2d/wk continuous moderate-intensity exercise (CME) (-200kcals/d). Diet and physical activity (PA) were assessed using 4-d weighed food and PA records, respectively; diet and exercise compliance were assessed monthly with multiple-pass 24-h recalls and weekly tracking logs. Body weight (BW), WC, DXA-assessed body composition (BF [%], BF [kg], trunk fat [kg], and LBM [kg]), blood lipids (total cholesterol [TC], high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C], low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C], triglycerides [TG]), glycemic markers (fasting plasma glucose [FPG], insulin, and homeostatic model assessment for insulin resistance [HOMA-IR], beta cell function [HOMA-%β] and insulin sensitivity [HOMA-%S]) and resting blood pressure (BP) (systolic BP [SBP]; diastolic BP [DBP]) were assessed pre/post-intervention. Repeated measures analysis of variance and two sample t-tests were used at analyze the date. Results are reported as means±standard deviations. Results: There were significant time, but not group, differences in BW (-5.1±2.6kg, p=0.0141), WC (- 7.3±3.6cm, p<0.0001), TC (-18.1±17.4mg/dL, p<0.0001), LDL-C (12.2± 16.2mg/dL, p<0.0001), TG (-25.3±56.2mg/dL, p=0.0064), insulin (-2.1±4.2mg/dL, p=0.0048), HOMA-IR (-0.2±0.5, p=0.0062), HOMA-%β (-12.1±35.2%, p=0.0497), HOMA-%S (28.5±78.4%, p=0.0357), and SBP (-3±9mmHg, p=0.214). There were significant group x time differences in DBP (15PRO=-5±8mmHg, 25PRO=- 2±8mmHg; p=0.0024). There were no time or group differences in FPG or HDLC. There were significant time, but not group, effects on changes in BW (-5.1kg± 2.6, p<0.0001), BF (-3.3±1.6%, p<0.0001), and LBM (-0.6kg±1.5, p=0.0283). The 15PRO group lost more absolute whole BF (-5.2kg vs. -3.9kg, p=0.0355) and trunk fat (-3.1kg vs. -2.2kg) vs. the 25PRO group. Conclusion: Both diets significantly improved BW, AbOb, MetS risk factors, glycemic control, and BF (%); LBM (kg) loss was similar in both groups. Compared to the 15PRO diet had significantly greater absolute BF-kg and trunk fat-kg losses. Increased PRO intake did not improve AbOb or MetS risk beyond ER and HIT/CME. The impact of HIT/CME and the greater (-1.3kg) changes in BW in the 15PRO group may have contributed significantly to the changes in absolute BF and trunk fat. More research is needed to separate the impact of HIT/CME and weight loss from the impact of PRO during ER.
Resource Type
Date Available
Date Issued
Degree Level
Degree Name
Degree Field
Degree Grantor
Commencement Year
Committee Member
Academic Affiliation
Non-Academic Affiliation
Rights Statement
Peer Reviewed



This work has no parents.

In Collection: