Skip to main content
PMC home page
Nutrients logoLink to Nutrients
. 2022 Aug 29;14(17):3559. doi: 10.3390/nu14173559

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Fasting and Lifestyle Modification in Patients with Metabolic Syndrome: Effects on Patient-Reported Outcomes

Michael Jeitler 1,2,*, Romy Lauche 3, Christoph Hohmann 1, Kyung-Eun (Anna) Choi 4, Nadia Schneider 5, Nico Steckhan 1,6, Florian Rathjens 5, Dennis Anheyer 5, Anna Paul 5, Christel von Scheidt 2, Thomas Ostermann 7, Elisabeth Schneider 1, Daniela Koppold-Liebscher 1,2, Christian S Kessler 1,2, Gustav Dobos 5, Andreas Michalsen 1,2, Holger Cramer 3,5,8,9
Editor: Benjamin D Horne
PMCID: PMC9460714  PMID: 36079816

Abstract

Lifestyle interventions can have a positive impact on quality of life and psychological parameters in patients with metabolic syndrome (MetS). In this randomized controlled trial, 145 participants with MetS (62.8% women; 59.7 ± 9.3 years) were randomized to (1) 5-day fasting followed by 10 weeks of lifestyle modification (F + LM; modified DASH diet, exercise, mindfulness; n = 73) or (2) 10 weeks of lifestyle modification only (LM; n = 72). Outcomes were assessed at weeks 0, 1, 12, and 24, and included quality of life (Short-Form 36 Health Survey Questionnaire, SF-36), anxiety/depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, HADS), stress (Cohen Perceived Stress Scale, CPSS), mood (Profile of Mood States, POMS), self-efficacy (General Self-Efficacy Scale, GSE), mindfulness (Mindfulness Attention Awareness Scale, MAAS), and self-compassion (Self-Compassion Scale, SCS). At week 1, POMS depression and fatigue scores were significantly lower in F + LM compared to LM. At week 12, most self-report outcomes improved in both groups—only POMS vigor was significantly higher in F + LM than in LM. Most of the beneficial effects within the groups persisted at week 24. Fasting can induce mood-modulating effects in the short term. LM induced several positive effects on quality of life and psychological parameters in patients with MetS.

Keywords: fasting, metabolic syndrome, modified DASH diet, Mediterranean diet, lifestyle, relaxation, mindfulness, MICOM (Mind-Body Medicine in Integrative and Complementary Medicine), self-efficacy

1. Introduction

The metabolic syndrome (MetS) is a condition characterized by the presence of at least three cardiovascular risk factors, such as abdominal obesity, hypertension, insulin resistance, and dyslipidemia [1]. It affects approximately one in three American adults and one in four adults in Europe [2,3]. Most cardiovascular risk factors can be influenced by patient behavior; this is particularly true for poor diet, lack of exercise, and psychological stress [4].

Epidemiological studies highlight the role of psychological risk factors such as psychosocial stress, depression and, anxiety in patients with MetS and cardiovascular disease [5,6,7]. In addition to physical complaints, patients with MetS often have impaired quality of life and psychological state [8,9].

Cardiovascular behavioral prevention requires comprehensive cardiological programs that consider mind-body interventions in addition to aspects of lifestyle and risk factor management, which should be delivered by interdisciplinary teams of health care professionals [6]. While comprehensive lifestyle modification interventions targeting physical inactivity, diet, and psychosocial stress have shown beneficial effects on cardiovascular risk factors [10,11,12], fewer data are available from these programs on patient-reported outcomes (PRO) like mood, distress, and quality of life [9,13,14].

Mind-body medicine (MBM) is an important method within Complementary and Integrative Medicine (CIM) therapies and is defined as “practices that focus on the interactions among the brain, mind, body, and behaviour” and the ways in which emotional, mental, social, spiritual, and behavioural factors can directly affect heath [15]. More broadly, MBM also includes health-related lifestyle topics to improve patient self-efficacy and self-care, particularly related to exercise, diet, relaxation, and self-care strategies [15].

MBM interventions include structured stress reduction programs, relaxation techniques, meditative movement exercises such as yoga, tai chi, and qigong, and mindfulness, which has been identified as a key method of meditation [16]. It can be described as “a particular way of being characterized by nonjudgmental, moment-to-moment alertness in daily life outside of formal meditation practice” [17]. Various MBM interventions such as yoga, qigong, tai chi, and mindfulness training have been studied in patients with obesity and metabolic syndrome in randomized controlled clinical trials [18,19,20]. In addition to improving cardio-metabolic health, yoga and tai chi in particular have been found to have positive effects on quality of life, psychological well-being, and stress levels in patients with MetS [19,20].

Another CIM intervention that has been very well studied in recent years is fasting [21,22,23,24]. Fasting for a longer period of time, usually from 3 to 21 or more days, has a long tradition in Europe. (Prolonged) fasting can affect the psyche including an induction of mood-modulating effects [25,26,27].

While the aforementioned studies evaluated unimodal interventions in clinical trials, we combined these methods into a comprehensive lifestyle modification program, named MICOM (Mind-Body Medicine in Integrative and Complementary Medicine) [15]. This study aimed to assess effects of fasting followed by the MICOM lifestyle modification intervention in patients with MetS on patient-reported outcomes, compared to a lifestyle modification intervention only.

2. Methods

2.1. Design

This single-blind, bicenter, randomized controlled study was conducted at the Charité Outpatient Center for Complementary and Integrative Medicine at Immanuel Hospital Berlin, Berlin, Germany, and the Department of Internal and Integrative Medicine, Evang. Kliniken Essen-Mitte, Essen, Germany. The study was approved by the ethics committees of the Charité—Universitätsmedizin Berlin (EA4/141/13) and the University of Duisburg-Essen (14-5733 BO). The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02099968) prior to patient recruitment. The study was conducted and reported according to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials 2010 guidelines [28]. No changes were made to the study protocol after initiation of the study.

2.2. Participants

Patients were recruited via local newspaper advertisements and in the study departments, screened for eligibility by a study nurse, and, if they appeared eligible, assessed by a study physician. If the screened patients met all inclusion criteria and no exclusion criteria, informed consent was obtained, and they were enrolled in the study.

Patients presenting a metabolic syndrome according to the NCEP-ATP-III criteria (National Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults) were included. They also had to be diagnosed with systolic hypertension and/or additional subclinical atherosclerosis (<50% coronary artery stenosis, <50% carotid artery stenosis, peripheral artery disease stage 1).

Exclusion criteria included (1) diabetes mellitus type 1 or insulin bolus therapy, (2) coronary artery disease, myocardial infarction, pulmonary embolism, or stroke within the past 3 months, (3) heart failure ≥ NYHA stage I, (4) peripheral artery disease ≥ stage 2, (5) chronic kidney disease ≥ stage 2, (6) eating disorder, dementia or psychosis, and (7) other severe internal diseases.

2.3. Interventions

Both interventions were group-based and delivered by a multidisciplinary team of health professionals such as nutritional counselors, sport therapists, and mind-body therapists with board certified education. They incorporated aspects of the Mind-Body program which was originally developed by the Benson-Henry Mind/Body Medical Institute at Harvard Medical School and further developed and further developed and adapted to German needs, as described in the MICOM (Mind-Body Medicine in Integrative and Complementary Medicine) program [15]. In this program a focus is set on mindfulness and specific group trainings that are rooted in psychoneuroendocrinology, using formal meditation and gentle yoga exercises. Nutritional education included lectures, cooking workshops, as well as group support.

2.4. Fasting and Lifestyle Modification (F + LM)

Participants started with 2 vegan days (max. 1200 kcal/day), followed by 5 days of fasting (max. 350 kcal/day), and a stepwise reintroduction of food. Then they participated in the 10-week MICOM comprehensive multimodal lifestyle modification intervention with weekly 6-h sessions [29]. These included lectures and cooking classes on whole-food vegetarian diets with emphasis on a plant-based Mediterranean diet and a modified DASH diet, intermittent fasting (rice day once a week), and recommendations for certain cardioprotective foods [30,31,32,33]. Furthermore, moderate aerobic exercise such as walking and progressive muscle relaxation, mindfulness meditation, and yoga were trained. After completion of the program, monthly group sessions were offered during weeks 13 to 24 to ensure longer-term adherence.

2.5. Lifestyle Modification (LM)

The lifestyle intervention was like the one performed for the F + LM group, but without the initial fasting intervention. The program consisted of 55 h of group intervention over a period of 10 weeks. After the end of the program, in months 13 to 24, monthly group sessions were offered to ensure longer-term adherence.

2.6. Randomization

Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either F + LM or LM by block randomization with randomly varying block lengths, stratified by (a) study center and (b) taking/not taking antihypertensive medication. The randomization list was generated by a biometrician not involved in patient recruitment or assessment using Random Allocation software (version 1.0, Mahmood Saghaei, Isfahan, Iran) [34]. The list was password protected, and no person other than the biometrician had access to it. On this basis, he prepared sealed, sequentially numbered opaque envelopes containing the assignments to the interventions. After obtaining written informed consent and baseline assessment, the study physician opened the envelope with the lowest number to reveal the assignment for that patient.

2.7. Outcome Measures

Outcomes were assessed at baseline and at 1, 12 and 24 weeks after randomization by a blinded outcome assessor who was not involved in patient recruitment, allocation, or treatment. Physician-assessed outcomes, laboratory parameters, safety data, and explorative experimental variables (immune function, microbiome) were also assessed and have been reported elsewhere [35]. In the here presented analysis, the following PRO were used and will be reported:

  • Quality of life on the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item-Short-Form (SF-36) including eight dimensions of health: physical functioning (10 items), social role functioning (2 items), physical role functioning (4 items), emotional role functioning (3 items), mental health (5 items), vitality (4 items), bodily pain (2 items), and general health perceptions (5 items), and the physical and mental component score [36].

  • Anxiety and depression on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) [37], a 14-item scale for the assessment of anxiety and depression symptoms.

  • Stress on the Cohen Perceived Stress Scale (CPSS) for the assessment of subjective stress within the last week including 14 items about current levels of experienced and perceived stress [38].

  • Mood on the The Aktuelle Stimmungsskala (ASTS), the German version of the Profile of Mood States (POMS) [39]. The POMS is a 35-item instrument that measures four domains of mood disfunction assessing the subscales vigor, fatigue, depression, and anger [40].

  • Self-efficacy on the 10-item General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE) [41]. Self-efficacy is a construct that “reflects an optimistic self-belief that one can master a difficult task or cope with adversity” [41]. Self-efficacy makes it easier to set goals, make efforts, persevere in the face of obstacles, and recover from setbacks. It can be considered a resource for resilience.

  • Mindfulness on the 15-item Mindfulness Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS) [42]. Mindfulness is characterized by the following three qualities: (1) intentional, (2) related to the present moment, and (3) nonjudgmental.

  • Self-compassion on the 26-Item Self-Compassion Scale (SCS) [43]. Self-compassion refers to a positive basic attitude toward oneself even in difficult life situations. This personality trait has proven to be an effective protective factor that promotes emotional resilience.

2.8. Sample Size Calculation and Statistical Analysis

The sample size was calculated a priori using G*Power software [44]. Based on prior research on multimodal lifestyle interventions [10,45], yoga [46], mindfulness [47], and Mediterranean diet [48], a between-group effect size of d = 0.5 was expected. A level 2.5% t-test requires a total of 64 patients per group to detect a respective group difference with a statistical power of 80%. Accounting for a potential loss of power because of a maximum of 10% dropouts, it was intended to include a minimum of 142 participants in this trial.

All analyses were performed intention-to-treat, which means that all participants were randomized, whether or not they provided a complete data set or adhered to the study protocol. Missing data were multiply imputed by Markov chain Monte Carlo methods [49,50], yielding a total of 50 complete data sets.

Group differences were analyzed by univariate analyses of covariance (ANCOVA) modeling the outcome at week 1, 12, or 24 as a function of the treatment group (classified factor), the stratification factors study center (classified covariate) and baseline antihypertensive medication intake (classified covariate), and the respective baseline value (linear covariate). Afterwards, the 50 estimates of group differences were combined to produce overall effect size estimates, 95% confidence intervals, and p-values. Within-group changes over time were analyzed by paired t-tests. p-Values ≤ 0.05 were considered significant.

All analyses were performed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences software (IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, release 22.0. Armonk, NY, USA: IBM Group).

3. Results

3.1. Patients

A total of 452 patients were screened by telephone and 258 were excluded because they did not meet the inclusion criteria (Figure 1). A further 49 patients were excluded after medical assessment onsite. Finally, 145 participants were enrolled after informed consent and were randomized to the F + LM group (n = 73) or the LM group (n = 72). A total of 15 participants each were lost to follow-up in the F + LM and LM groups during the study period (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

Study flow chart. F + LM, fasting and lifestyle modification; LM, lifestyle modification.

Patients were recruited between April 2014 (first patient in) and December 2014. The last follow-up assessment was completed in December 2015 (last patient out).

Participants’ characteristics are provided in Table 1. About two thirds of the participants were female and about one third had a university degree (mean age 59.7 ± 9.3 years). Participants had a BMI of 33.3 ± 4.5 kg/m2. Participants in the F + LM group attended a mean of 8.2 ± 2.3 (82%) out of 10 possible intervention sessions; those in the LM group attended 7.1 ± 3.5 (71%) sessions (p = 0.124).

Table 1.

Baseline sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. If not otherwise denoted, values are reported as mean ± standard deviation.

Total
(n = 145)		 F + LM
(n = 73)		 LM
(n = 72)
Sociodemographic characteristics
Gender female n (%) 91 (62.8%) 48 (65.8%) 43 (59.7%)
Age years 59.7 ± 9.3 58.6 ± 10.8 60.8 ± 7.5
Marital status n (%)
Single 15 (10.3%) 6 (8.2%) 9 (12.5%)
Married 98 (67.6%) 49 (67.1%) 49 (68.1%)
Divorced 21 (14.5%) 12 (16.4%) 9 (12.5%)
Widowed 5 (3.4%) 3 (4.1%) 2 (2.8%)
Education n (%)
Secondary modern school (“Hauptschule”) qualification 25 (17.2%) 9 (12.3%) 16 (22.2%)
High school (“Realschule”) qualification 41 (28.3%) 19 (26.0%) 22 (30.6%)
A level (“Abitur”) 18 (12.4%) 12 (16.4%) 6 (8.3%)
University degree 53 (36.6%) 28 (38.3%) 25 (34.7%)
Employment n (%)
Employed full-time 41 (28.3%) 20 (27.4%) 21 (29.2%)
Employed part-time 19 (13.1%) 11 (15.1%) 8 (11.1%)
Occasionally 5 (3.4%) 3 (4.1%) 2 (2.8%)
On sick leave 3 (2.1%) 2 (2.7%) 1 (1.4%)
Unemployed 3 (2.1%) 2 (2.7%) 1 (1.4%)
Retired age-related 44 (30.3%) 20 (27.4%) 24 (33.3%)
Retired health-related 15 (10.3%) 7 (9.6%) 8 (11.1%)
Homekeeper 10 (6.9%) 6 (8.2%) 4 (5.6%)
Clinical characteristics
Weight (kg) 97.0 ± 15.8 98.1 ± 16.1 95.9 ± 15.5
Body Mass Index (kg/m2) 33.3 ± 4.5 33.7 ± 4.5 32.8 ± 4.5
Clinical systolic BP (mmHg) 140.0 ± 16.8 138.9 ± 14.4 141.2 ± 19.0
Clinical diastolic BP (mmHg) 88.9 ± 10.9 88.3 ± 10.6 89.5 ± 11.2
Waist circumference (cm) 113.1 ± 10.8 114.1 ± 10.5 112.1 ± 11.1
HDL cholesterol (mg/dL) 55.0 ± 17.6 53.4 ± 16.0 56.6 ± 19.0
Triglyceride (mg/dL) 181.8 ± 194.0 188.0 ± 210.6 175.5 ± 111.1
Blood glucose (mg/dL) 111.7 ± 20.5 113.3 ± 18.9 110.1 ± 22.0
Open in a new tab

Abbreviations: F + LM, fasting and lifestyle modification; LM, lifestyle modification.

3.2. Outcome Measures

Detailed results are provided in Table 2 and Figure 2. At week 1, POMS depression (Δ = −4.34; 95% confidence interval [CI] = −8.67 to −0.01) and fatigue scores (Δ = −4.91; 95% CI = −8.82 to −1.01) were significantly lower in F + LM compared to LM. From week 0 to 12, most self-report outcomes (i.e., quality of life on SF-36, anxiety/depression on HADS, stress on CPSS, mood on POMS, self-efficacy on GSE, mindfulness on MAAS, and self-compassion on SCS) improved in both groups in the range of small to moderate effect sizes; however, only POMS vigor was significantly higher in F + LM than in LM (Δ = 3.60; 95% CI = 0.30 to 6.90). Most positive within-group effects persisted in week 24; only self-compassion was significantly higher in the LM than in F + LM at this time point (Δ = 2.41; 95% CI = 0.69 to 4.16).

Table 2.

Effects of the study interventions on patient-reported outcomes. Bold p-values indicate significant group differences (p < 0.05).

Week 0 Week 1 Week 12 Week 24
Outcome Group Mean ± SD Mean ± SD Pwithin Pbetween Cohen’s d Mean ± SD Pwithin Pbetween Cohen’s d Mean ± SD Pwithin Pbetween Cohen’s d
SF-36 Physical functioning F + LM 73.3 ± 17.8 75.8 ± 18.8 0.077 0.858 0.03 83.1 ± 17.4 <0.001 0.324 0.15 82.9 ± 16.5 <0.001 0.541 0.10
LM 74.2 ± 20.6 75.9 ± 21.2 0.118 81.4 ± 19.1 <0.001 81.2 ± 22.5 <0.001
SF-36 Physical role functioning F + LM 61.0 ± 40.0 58.1 ± 39.0 0.453 0.244 0.21 78.0 ± 33.3 <0.001 0.104 0.31 69.2 ± 37.5 0.092 0.756 0.06
LM 63.2 ± 41.1 65.0 ± 38.9 0.595 70.5 ± 36.0 0.059 68.1 ± 38.3 0.147
SF-36 Bodily pain F + LM 56.8 ± 22.9 57.3 ± 24.0 0.812 0.119 0.28 69.6 ± 24.0 <0.001 0.238 0.28 64.1 ± 24.5 0.006 0.545 0.13
LM 62.0 ± 26.8 63.0 ± 25.6 0.654 65.0 ± 29.2 0.337 69.1 ± 27.7 0.008
SF-36 General health perceptions F + LM 58.3 ± 16.8 63.5 ± 17.1 0.001 0.238 0.27 70.1 ± 17.7 <0.001 0.370 0.20 69.3 ± 16.8 <0.001 0.527 0.14
LM 58.1 ± 16.7 59.5 ± 18.4 0.367 65.9 ± 19.0 <0.001 66.1 ± 19.1 <0.001
SF-36 Vitality F + LM 55.0 ± 19.7 58.4 ± 19.6 0.014 0.695 0.05 67.7 ± 17.0 <0.001 0.121 0.25 63.5 ± 20.2 <0.001 0.678 0.08
LM 56.8 ± 21.4 58.4 ± 21.0 0.192 63.5 ± 21.0 <0.001 61.8 ± 23.7 0.004
SF-36 Social role functioning F + LM 70.4 ± 27.8 75.9 ± 27.7 0.023 0.722 0.07 83.7 ± 23.2 <0.001 0.176 0.25 81.0 ± 24.0 <0.001 0.922 0.02
LM 80.7 ± 23.4 79.4 ± 25.3 0.514 82.2 ± 24.6 0.493 83.3 ± 21.0 0.275
SF-36 Emotional role functioning F + LM 68.9 ± 37.8 70.9 ± 39.1 0.605 0.495 0.13 77.3 ± 31.9 0.030 0.504 0.12 77.1 ± 33.7 0.012 0.957 0.01
LM 72.2 ± 39.6 71.1 ± 39.6 0.722 80.4 ± 34.4 0.036 80.5 ± 34.2 0.017
SF-36 Mental health F + LM 66.9 ± 18.8 71.5 ± 19.5 0.002 0.444 0.12 75.6 ± 16.8 <0.001 0.128 0.23 73.0 ± 20.2 <0.001 0.887 0.03
LM 70.7 ± 17.8 71.4 ± 18.2 0.536 75.5 ± 15.2 0.001 74.0 ± 18.2 0.027
SF-36 Physical component score F + LM 43.2 ± 8.9 43.4 ± 8.4 0.739 0.131 0.24 48.5 ± 8.4 <0.001 0.177 0.26 47.2 ± 8.2 <0.001 0.990 0.01
LM 43.6 ± 9.6 44.5 ± 10.0 0.223 46.1 ± 9.8 0.006 46.4 ± 10.4 0.002
SF-36 Mental component score F + LM 46.7 ± 11.4 49.0 ± 11.9 0.005 0.129 0.22 51.1 ± 10.3 <0.001 0.096 0.24 50.2 ± 12.1 <0.001 0.594 0.10
LM 49.2 ± 11.0 48.9 ± 10.7 0.580 51.3 ± 9.2 0.017 50.8 ± 10.3 0.065
HADS Anxiety F + LM 6.5 ± 4.2 5.5 ± 4.0 <0.001 0.303 0.16 4.9 ± 3.3 <0.001 0.227 0.18 5.2 ± 3.6 <0.001 0.206 0.21
LM 5.8 ± 3.8 5.9 ± 3.8 0.751 4.3 ± 3.1 <0.001 4.8 ± 3.4 0.004
HADS Depression F + LM 5.1 ± 3.5 4.1 ± 3.7 <0.001 0.386 0.15 3.4 ± 3.1 <0.001 0.432 0.13 3.6 ± 3.7 <0.001 0.740 0.07
LM 5.2 ± 3.6 4.9 ± 3.9 0.367 3.9 ± 3.5 <0.001 4.1 ± 3.9 0.004
CPSS F + LM 14.0 ± 3.1 NA NA NA NA 12.2 ± 3.1 <0.001 0.070 0.33 12.4 ± 3.4 <0.001 0.064 0.37
LM 13.4 ± 3.5 NA NA 12.6 ± 3.4 0.005 12.6 ± 3.4 0.020
POMS Depression F + LM 13.7 ± 15.0 9.5 ± 12.9 <0.001 0.049 0.30 8.9 ± 11.4 <0.001 0.397 0.11 10.9 ± 14.7 0.010 0.504 0.12
LM 11.3 ± 13.9 11.0 ± 13.0 0.747 9.4 ± 13.5 0.065 11.1 ± 15.3 0.856
POMS Fatigue F + LM 16.8 ± 9.4 12.1 ± 8.7 <0.001 0.014 0.50 9.5 ± 7.4 <0.001 0.206 0.23 11.6 ± 9.3 <0.001 0.549 0.12
LM 14.8 ± 10.2 13.3 ± 10.4 0.096 11.5 ± 9.9 0.001 10.9 ± 10.3 <0.001
POMS Vigor F + LM 22.0 ± 8.1 24.1 ± 8.3 0.010 0.629 0.10 26.1 ± 6.8 <0.001 0.033 0.45 25.8 ± 7.9 <0.001 0.147 0.30
LM 22.1 ± 7.9 23.0 ± 9.0 0.264 23.1 ± 8.6 0.278 23.1 ± 8.1 0.260
POMS Anger F + LM 8.3 ± 9.0 6.0 ± 6.9 0.001 0.089 0.27 6.0 ± 6.9 0.001 0.412 0.14 7.1 ± 8.0 0.087 0.192 0.23
LM 6.6 ± 7.2 5.7 ± 6.7 0.138 5.7 ± 6.7 0.279 4.5 ± 6.4 0.010
GSE F + LM 29.4 ± 5.7 30.5 ± 5.2 0.020 0.244 0.17 31.2 ± 4.6 <0.001 0.206 0.19 31.3 ± 5.3 <0.001 0.262 0.19
LM 30.0 ± 5.7 30.2 ± 5.8 0.553 30.5 ± 5.9 0.170 30.8 ± 6.1 0.061
MAAS F + LM 4.3 ± 0.9 NA NA NA NA 4.4 ± 0.8 0.030 0.696 0.06 4.5 ± 0.8 0.001 0.265 0.18
LM 4.6 ± 0.7 NA NA 4.6 ± 0.7 0.183 4.7 ± 0.7 0.169
SCS F + LM 33.7 ± 5.5 33.5 ± 4.9 0.702 0.618 0.09 33.3 ± 4.5 0.503 0.698 0.06 32.9 ± 5.0 0.060 0.007 0.41
LM 32.6 ± 6.2 33.7 ± 4.5 0.110 32.6 ± 5.0 0.978 33.6 ± 4.6 0.057
Open in a new tab

Abbreviations: CPSS, Cohen Perceived Stress Scale; F + LM, fasting and lifestyle modification; LM, lifestyle modification; GSE, General Self-Efficacy Scale; HADS, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; MAAS, Mindfulness Attention Awareness Scale; NA, not assessed; Pbetween, between-group differences (analysis of covariances); Pwithin, within-group changes from baseline (paired t-test); POMS, Profile of Mood States; SCS, Self-Compassion Scale; SD, standard deviation; SF-36, Short-Form 36 Health Survey Questionnaire.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

Multiplot on patient-reported outcomes. CPSS, Cohen Perceived Stress Scale; F + LM, fasting and lifestyle modification; LM, lifestyle modification; GSE, General Self-Efficacy Scale; HADS, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; MAAS, Mindfulness Attention Awareness Scale; POMS, Profile of Mood States; SCS, Self-Compassion Scale; SF-36, Short-Form 36 Health Survey Questionnaire.

4. Discussion

This study investigated the effects of fasting, followed by a multimodal lifestyle modification intervention as described in the MICOM Model, on patient-reported outcomes in patients with MetS compared to a lifestyle modification intervention only. After the multimodal lifestyle modification intervention, we found improvements for all outcome measures, namely quality of life, anxiety, depression, stress, mood as well as self-efficacy, mindfulness, and self-compassion, which persisted at the follow-up after 24 weeks. Comparing the groups (1) at week 1, depression and fatigue scores (POMS) were significantly lower; (2) at week 12, only vigor (POMS) was significantly higher; and (3) at week 24, self-compassion was significantly lower in the group that fasted additionally.

The study participants were demographically heterogeneous. More than 60% were women. The distribution of educational attainment was broad, with a slight shift toward those with higher education. The inclusion criteria of the study led to a large proportion of patients who were German adults with metabolic syndrome. This suggests that the results of the study should be transferable to a large proportion of the German population. Baseline scores indicated the studied population having impaired quality of life and moods as well as depressive symptomatology and anxiety upon study entry.

The five-day fast (max. 350 kcal/day) implemented at week 1 reduced depression and fatigue scores in the F + LM group. This is in line with other findings, as especially (prolonged) fasting is known to influence the psyche positively, inducing mood-modulating effects [25,26,27]. Furthermore, participants in the F + LM group had a higher vigor score at the end of fasting as well as at the 12-week follow-up. Recent studies showed that fasting can increase vigor and vitality, emotional balance, and daytime concentration [26,51]. Fasting is also associated with increased availability of neurotrophic factors in the brain, including serotonin, endogenous opioids, and endocannabinoids, which may also contribute to improved vigor and mood [52,53].

Compared to lifestyle modification only, fasting significantly induced several positive short-term effects in physical parameters, which are reported in detail elsewhere. Especially the observed moderate weight loss and the reduction in waist circumference could lead to positive psychological experiences and may have mood-lifting effects. It should be mentioned that fasting has also been reported to potentially have negative effects on mood, e.g., increased irritability and mood lability [25,27]. However, such side effects were not detectable in our study.

Interestingly, a recent study reported differences in psychological well-being depending on whether or not participants had previous experience with fasting [27]. The group with fasting novices had overall more negative psychological states (i.e., increased appetite, increased negative moods, increased stress, and reduced vitality) during the fast. Therefore, previous fasting experience may buffer negative feelings during a fast. However, previous fasting experiences were not recorded in our study.

We found that self-compassion was significantly higher in participants who received only lifestyle change than in participants who received fasting plus lifestyle change. This finding seems to contradict the hypothesized positive effects of fasting. We would not assume that this finding indicates a harmful effect of fasting. The authors are not aware of any other studies on self-compassion and fasting. However, this finding is interesting and may be worth further investigation.

Several parameters may have clinically relevant effects. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the SF-36 physical component score is defined as a value of 2 and for the SF-36 mental component score as 3 points; in our study the increases were greater than 2 and 3 points, respectively, for both groups, resulting in a relevant clinical improvement [54]. The MCID for HADS in patients with cardiovascular disease is defined at a value of 1.7 points, which the study participants also achieved at the 12-week visit in both groups [55]. No MCID is available for CPSS and POMS, but the effects at the 12- and 24-week follow-ups are also in the range of moderate effect sizes.

Various MBM interventions such as yoga, qigong, tai chi, and mindfulness training have been studied in patients with obesity and metabolic syndrome in randomized controlled clinical trials [18,19,20]. In addition to improving cardio-metabolic health, yoga and tai chi in particular have been shown to improve stress, quality of life, and psychological parameters in patients with MetS [20,56].

The MBM lifestyle modification intervention led to an improvement of self-efficacy, mindfulness, and self-compassion in our study population. These parameters could interact with each other. Further studies to explore explanatory models for the effects of MBM are warranted. In particular, mediating variables on mindfulness, self-efficacy, and compassion, and the effects on physical and psychological parameters, need to be examined more closely.

Our study has several limitations. First, the implementation of a control group with no initial fasting could lead to nonspecific effects due to disappointment effects and may also have influenced the study results. Second, we have not assessed participants’ attitudes and motivation regarding the intervention. Third, the time intensity of the two programs was slightly different, as additional fasting was performed in the F + LM group. Another limitation is the predominant use of generic questionnaires in this study instead of condition-specific ones. On the one hand, this was done because epidemiological studies on metabolic syndrome also predominantly use generic instruments [9], which facilitates the comparison of the study results with those in the population. On the other hand, due to the general lack of specific subjective symptoms in metabolic syndrome, there are hardly any specific questionnaires and, accordingly, previous studies have relied on questionnaires specific to individual symptoms (e.g., obesity). Nevertheless, the lack of specific measures is a limitation, and future studies should use condition-specific questionnaires, at least in addition to generic ones. Finally, the extent to which patients adhered to the program by using stress reduction techniques at home was not assessed.

5. Conclusions

In summary, the results of this study point to beneficial and clinically relevant effects of fasting and intensified lifestyle modification on quality of life and psychological parameters. In addition, the used combination of interventions appears to have a sustained effect that needs to be further demonstrated in studies with longer-term follow-up. Further trials could compare comprehensive lifestyle interventions with less intensive and even unimodal interventions and assess cost-effectiveness. Further evaluation of mediating variables such as mindfulness, self-efficacy, and self-compassion in relation to psychological parameters, and interaction with improvements in physical and psychological parameters in the context of complex lifestyle interventions, is warranted.

Author Contributions

M.J. and H.C.: guarantors of article. M.J.: investigation, writing—original draft preparation, review and editing. R.L.: conceptualization, project administration, supervision, writing—review and editing. C.H.: conceptualization, supervision, project administration, investigation, writing—review and editing. N.S. (Nadia Schneider): investigation, data curation, writing—review and editing. F.R.: investigation, data curation, writing—review and editing. D.A.: data curation, writing—review and editing. A.P.: conceptualization, writing—review and editing. C.v.S.: conceptualization, writing—review and editing. T.O.: conceptualization, data analysis, writing—review and editing. K.-E.C.: conceptualization, writing—review and editing. E.S.: investigation, data curation, writing—review and editing. D.K.-L.: writing—review and editing. C.S.K.: writing—review and editing. N.S. (Nico Steckhan): conceptualization, supervision, investigation, data curation, writing—review and editing. G.D.: conceptualization, writing—review and editing. A.M.: conceptualization, supervision, project administration, writing—review and editing. H.C.: conceptualization, project administration, formal analysis, data analysis, supervision, writing—original draft preparation, review and editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov under NCT02099968 and was approved by the respective ethics committee (Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin EA4/141/13, 16 January 2014) and the University of Duisburg-Essen (approval number: 14-5733 BO, 26 February 2014). It followed the Declaration of Helsinki and Good Clinical Practice guidelines for trial conduct.

Data Availability Statement

Data available on request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Funding Statement

This work was supported by Corona-Foundation, Germany (funding number: S199/10056/2012). The funder had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; or decision to submit the manuscript for publication. We acknowledge financial support from the Open Access Publication Fund of Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin and the German Research Foundation (DFG).

Footnotes

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

  • 1.Eckel R.H., Alberti K., Grundy S.M., Zimmet P.Z. The metabolic syndrome. Lancet. 2010;375:181–183. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61794-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Saklayen M.G. The Global Epidemic of the Metabolic Syndrome. Curr. Hypertens. Rep. 2018;20:12. doi: 10.1007/s11906-018-0812-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Scuteri A., Laurent S., Cucca F., Cockcroft J., Cunha P.G., Mañas L.R., Mattace Raso F.U., Muiesan M.L., Ryliškytė L., Rietzschel E., et al. Metabolic syndrome across Europe: Different clusters of risk factors. Eur. J. Prev. Cardiol. 2015;22:486–491. doi: 10.1177/2047487314525529. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Roth G.A., Mensah G.A., Johnson C.O., Addolorato G., Ammirati E., Baddour L.M., Barengo N.C., Beaton A.Z., Benjamin E.J., Benziger C.P., et al. Global Burden of Cardiovascular Diseases and Risk Factors, 1990–2019: Update From the GBD 2019 Study. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2020;76:2982–3021. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.11.010. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Rosengren A., Hawken S., Ounpuu S., Sliwa K., Zubaid M., Almahmeed W.A., Blackett K.N., Sitthi-amorn C., Sato H., Yusuf S. Association of psychosocial risk factors with risk of acute myocardial infarction in 11119 cases and 13648 controls from 52 countries (the INTERHEART study): Case-control study. Lancet. 2004;364:953–962. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)17019-0S0140-6736(04)17019-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Kotseva K., De Backer G., De Bacquer D., Ryden L., Hoes A., Grobbee D., Maggioni A., Marques-Vidal P., Jennings C., Abreu A., et al. Lifestyle and impact on cardiovascular risk factor control in coronary patients across 27 countries: Results from the European Society of Cardiology ESC-EORP EUROASPIRE V registry. Eur. J. Prev. Cardiol. 2019;26:824–835. doi: 10.1177/2047487318825350. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Inoue K., Horwich T., Bhatnagar R., Bhatt K., Goldwater D., Seeman T., Watson K.E. Urinary Stress Hormones, Hypertension, and Cardiovascular Events: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis. Hypertension. 2021;78:1640–1647. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.121.17618. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Marcos-Delgado A., López-García E., Martínez-González M.A., Salas-Salvadó J., Corella D., Fitó M., Romaguera D., Vioque J., Alonso-Gómez A.M., Wärnberg J., et al. Health-related quality of life in individuals with metabolic syndrome: A cross-sectional study. Semergen. 2020;46:524–537. doi: 10.1016/j.semerg.2020.03.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Saboya P.P., Bodanese L.C., Zimmermann P.R., Gustavo A.D., Assumpção C.M., Londero F. Metabolic syndrome and quality of life: A systematic review. Rev. Lat. Am. Enferm. 2016;24:e2848. doi: 10.1590/1518-8345.1573.2848. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Ornish D., Brown S.E., Scherwitz L.W., Billings J.H., Armstrong W.T., Ports T.A., McLanahan S.M., Kirkeeide R.L., Brand R.J., Gould K.L. Can lifestyle changes reverse coronary heart disease? The Lifestyle Heart Trial. Lancet. 1990;336:129–133. doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(90)91656-u. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Cramer H., Lauche R., Paul A., Langhorst J., Michalsen A., Dobos G. MindñBody Medicine in the Secondary Prevention of Coronary Heart Disease. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2015;112:759–767. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2015.0759. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Lean M.E., Leslie W.S., Barnes A.C., Brosnahan N., Thom G., McCombie L., Peters C., Zhyzhneuskaya S., Al-Mrabeh A., Hollingsworth K.G., et al. Primary care-led weight management for remission of type 2 diabetes (DiRECT): An open-label, cluster-randomised trial. Lancet. 2018;391:541–551. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)33102-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Michalsen A., Grossman P., Lehmann N., Knoblauch N.T., Paul A., Moebus S., Budde T., Dobos G.J. Psychological and quality-of-life outcomes from a comprehensive stress reduction and lifestyle program in patients with coronary artery disease: Results of a randomized trial. Psychother. Psychosom. 2005;74:344–352. doi: 10.1159/000087781. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Lin C.H., Chiang S.L., Tzeng W.C., Chiang L.C. Systematic review of impact of lifestyle-modification programs on metabolic risks and patient-reported outcomes in adults with metabolic syndrome. Worldviews Evid.-Based Nurs. 2014;11:361–368. doi: 10.1111/wvn.12069. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Dobos G., Paul A. Mind-Body-Medizin—Integrative Konzepte zur Ressourcenstärkung und Lebensstilveränderung. Urban & Fischer Verlag/Elsevier GmbH; Munich, Germany: 2019. [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Kabat-Zinn J. Full Catastrophe Living: Using the Wisdom of Your Body and Mind to Face Stress, Pain, and Illness. Delta Trade Paperback/Bantam Dell; New York, NY, USA: 1990. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Bishop S.R., Lau M., Shapiro S., Carlson L., Anderson N.D., Carmody J., Segal Z.V., Abbey S., Speca M., Velting D., et al. Mindfulness: A proposed operational definition. Clin. Psychol. Sci. Pract. 2004;11:230–241. [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Chu P., Gotink R.A., Yeh G.Y., Goldie S.J., Hunink M.G. The effectiveness of yoga in modifying risk factors for cardiovascular disease and metabolic syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur. J. Prev. Cardiol. 2016;23:291–307. doi: 10.1177/2047487314562741. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Cramer H., Thoms M.S., Anheyer D., Lauche R., Dobos G. Yoga in Women with Abdominal Obesity: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Dtsch. Arztebl. Int. 2016;113:645–652. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2016.0645. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Chau J.P.C., Leung L.Y.L., Liu X., Lo S.H.S., Choi K.C., Zhao J., Chiang H.C.Y. Effects of Tai Chi on health outcomes among community-dwelling adults with or at risk of metabolic syndrome: A systematic review. Complement. Ther. Clin. Pract. 2021;44:101445. doi: 10.1016/j.ctcp.2021.101445. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Wei M., Brandhorst S., Shelehchi M., Mirzaei H., Cheng C.W., Budniak J., Groshen S., Mack W.J., Guen E., Di Biase S., et al. Fasting-mimicking diet and markers/risk factors for aging, diabetes, cancer, and cardiovascular disease. Sci. Transl. Med. 2017;9:eaai8700. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aai8700. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Mattson M.P., Longo V.D., Harvie M. Impact of intermittent fasting on health and disease processes. Ageing Res. Rev. 2017;39:46–58. doi: 10.1016/j.arr.2016.10.005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Fanti M., Mishra A., Longo V.D., Brandhorst S. Time-Restricted Eating, Intermittent Fasting, and Fasting-Mimicking Diets in Weight Loss. Curr. Obes. Rep. 2021;10:70–80. doi: 10.1007/s13679-021-00424-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Longo V.D., Mattson M.P. Fasting: Molecular mechanisms and clinical applications. Cell Metab. 2014;19:181–192. doi: 10.1016/j.cmet.2013.12.008. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Watkins E., Serpell L. The Psychological Effects of Short-Term Fasting in Healthy Women. Front. Nutr. 2016;3:27. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2016.00027. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Hussin N.M., Shahar S., Teng N.I., Ngah W.Z., Das S.K. Efficacy of fasting and calorie restriction (FCR) on mood and depression among ageing men. J. Nutr. Health Aging. 2013;17:674–680. doi: 10.1007/s12603-013-0344-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Ma Q., Yang C., Wu R., Wu M., Liu W., Dai Z., Li Y. How Experiences Affect Psychological Responses During Supervised Fasting: A Preliminary Study. Front. Psychol. 2021;12:651760. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.651760. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Schulz K.F., Altman D.G., Moher D. CONSORT 2010 statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. Ann. Intern. Med. 2010;152:726–732. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-152-11-201006010-00232. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Paul A., Lauche R., Cramer H., Altner N., Dobos G. An Integrative Day-Care Clinic for chronically ill patients: Concept and case presentation. Eur. J. Integr. Med. 2012;4:E455–E459. doi: 10.1177/1534735412473639. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.de Lorgeril M., Renaud S., Mamelle N., Salen P., Martin J.L., Monjaud I., Guidollet J., Touboul P., Delaye J. Mediterranean alpha-linolenic acid-rich diet in secondary prevention of coronary heart disease. Lancet. 1994;343:1454–1459. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(94)92580-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.De Lorgeril M., Salen P., Martin J.L., Mamelle N., Monjaud I., Touboul P., Delaye J. Effect of a mediterranean type of diet on the rate of cardiovascular complications in patients with coronary artery disease. Insights into the cardioprotective effect of certain nutriments. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 1996;28:1103–1108. doi: 10.1016/s0735-1097(96)00280-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Esposito K., Marfella R., Ciotola M., Di Palo C., Giugliano F., Giugliano G., D’Armiento M., D’Andrea F., Giugliano D. Effect of a mediterranean-style diet on endothelial dysfunction and markers of vascular inflammation in the metabolic syndrome: A randomized trial. JAMA. 2004;292:1440–1446. doi: 10.1001/jama.292.12.1440. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Kempner W. Treatment of hypertensive vascular disease with rice diet. Arch. Intern. Med. 1974;133:758–790. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Saghaei M. Random allocation software for parallel group randomized trials. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 2004;4:26. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-4-26. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Maifeld A., Bartolomaeus H., Löber U., Avery E.G., Steckhan N., Markó L., Wilck N., Hamad I., Šušnjar U., Mähler A., et al. Fasting alters the gut microbiome reducing blood pressure and body weight in metabolic syndrome patients. Nat. Commun. 2021;12:1970. doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-22097-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Bullinger M. German translation and psychometric testing of the SF-36 Health Survey: Preliminary results from the IQOLA Project. International Quality of Life Assessment. Soc. Sci. Med. 1995;41:1359–1366. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(95)00115-N. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Herrmann-Lingen C., Buss U., Snaith R. Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale—Deutsche Version (HADS-D) Hans Huber; Bern, Switzerland: 2011. 3., aktualisierte und neu normierte Auflage. [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Cohen S., Kamarck T., Mermelstein R. A global measure of perceived stress. J. Health Soc. Behav. 1983;24:385–396. doi: 10.2307/2136404. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Albani C., Blaser G., Geyer M., Schmutzer G., Brahler E., Bailer H., Grulke N. The German short version of “Profile of Mood States” (POMS): Psychometric evaluation in a representative sample. Psychother. Psychosom. Med. Psychol. 2005;55:324–330. doi: 10.1055/s-2004-834727. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.McNair D., Lorr M., Droppleman L., Biel B., Dangel S. Profile of mood states states (Dt. Bearbeitung) In: Scalarum C.I.P., editor. Collegium interantionale Psychiatriae Scalarum. Beltz Verlag; Weinheim, UK: 1981. [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Schwarzer R., Jerusalem M. Generalized Self-Efficacy scale. In: Weinman J., Wright S., Johnston M., editors. Measures in Health Psychology: A User’s Portfolio. NFER-NELSON; Windsor, UK: 1995. [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Michalak J., Heidenreich T., Ströhle G., Nachtigall C. Die deutsche Version der Mindful Attention and Awareness Scale (MAAS) Psychometrische Befunde zu einem Achtsamkeitsfragebogen. Z. Klin. Psychol. Psychother. 2008;37:200–208. doi: 10.1026/1616-3443.37.3.200. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Hupfeld J., Ruffieux N. Validierung einer deutschen Version der Self-Compassion Scale (SCS-D) Z. Klin. Psychol. Psychother. 2011;40:115–123. doi: 10.1026/1616-3443/a000088. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Faul F., Erdfelder E., Lang A.G., Buchner A. G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav. Res. Methods. 2007;39:175–191. doi: 10.3758/bf03193146. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Ornish D., Scherwitz L.W., Billings J.H., Brown S.E., Gould K.L., Merritt T.A., Sparler S., Armstrong W.T., Ports T.A., Kirkeeide R.L., et al. Intensive lifestyle changes for reversal of coronary heart disease. JAMA. 1998;280:2001–2007. doi: 10.1001/jama.280.23.2001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Cramer H., Lauche R., Haller H., Steckhan N., Michalsen A., Dobos G. Effects of yoga on cardiovascular disease risk factors: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int. J. Cardiol. 2014;173:170–183. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2014.02.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Hughes J.W., Fresco D.M., Myerscough R., van Dulmen M.H., Carlson L.E., Josephson R. Randomized controlled trial of mindfulness-based stress reduction for prehypertension. Psychosom. Med. 2013;75:721–728. doi: 10.1097/PSY.0b013e3182a3e4e5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Esposito K., Ciotola M., Giugliano D. Mediterranean diet and the metabolic syndrome. Mol. Nutr. Food Res. 2007;51:1268–1274. doi: 10.1002/mnfr.200600297. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Rubin D.B. Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys. John Wiley & Sons; New York, NY, USA: 1987. [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Schafer J.L. Analysis of Incomplete Multivariate Data. Chapman and Hall; New York, NY, USA: 1997. [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Michalsen A., Schlegel F., Rodenbeck A., Lüdtke R., Huether G., Teschler H., Dobos G.J. Effects of short-term modified fasting on sleep patterns and daytime vigilance in non-obese subjects: Results of a pilot study. Ann. Nutr. Metab. 2003;47:194–200. doi: 10.1159/000070485. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Michalsen A. Prolonged fasting as a method of mood enhancement in chronic pain syndromes: A review of clinical evidence and mechanisms. Curr. Pain. Headache Rep. 2010;14:80–87. doi: 10.1007/s11916-010-0104-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Fond G., Macgregor A., Leboyer M., Michalsen A. Fasting in mood disorders: Neurobiology and effectiveness. A review of the literature. Psychiatry Res. 2013;209:253–258. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2012.12.018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Maruish M., Maruish M., Kosinski M., Bjorner J., Gandek B., Turner-Bowker D., Ware J. User’s Manual for the SF-36v2 Survey. Quality Metric Incorporated; Lincoln, RI, USA: 2011. [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Lemay K.R., Tulloch H.E., Pipe A.L., Reed J.L. Establishing the Minimal Clinically Important Difference for the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale in Patients With Cardiovascular Disease. J. Cardiopulm. Rehabil. Prev. 2019;39:E6–E11. doi: 10.1097/HCR.0000000000000379. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Cramer H., Langhorst J., Dobos G., Lauche R. Yoga for metabolic syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur. J. Prev. Cardiol. 2016;23:1982–1993. doi: 10.1177/2047487316665729. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

Data available on request.

Articles from Nutrients are provided here courtesy of Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)

RESOURCES