1.
Effectiveness of Mindfulness Meditation vs Headache Education for Adults With Migraine: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Wells, RE, O'Connell, N, Pierce, CR, Estave, P, Penzien, DB, Loder, E, Zeidan, F, Houle, TT
JAMA internal medicine. 2021;181(3):317-328
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR), a standardized mind-body treatment that teaches momentary awareness with decreased sensory percept judgment, is associated with improvements in many chronic pain conditions. Mindfulness may be particularly helpful for migraine, as it diminishes affective responses to stress, the most common migraine trigger. This study is a double-blinded, randomized clinical trial of MBSR vs headache education for adults with migraine. The study enrolled 96 participants out of which 89 participants attended at least 1 class and completed at least 1 headache log (MBSR, 45; headache education, 44) across 7 cohorts. Participants were randomly assigned to one of the two arms. Results indicate that participants in both groups demonstrated a reduction of migraine days per month from baseline at 12 weeks. Furthermore, both groups sustained reductions in frequency of migraine and headache without group differences. Compared with headache education, MBSR participants had improvements in headache-related disability, quality of life, depression scores, self-efficacy, pain catastrophizing, and decreased experimentally induced pain intensity and unpleasantness out to 36 weeks. Authors conclude that mindfulness may help treat the total burden of migraine. However, a larger, more definitive study is needed to understand the impact of mindfulness on migraine.
Abstract
Importance: Migraine is the second leading cause of disability worldwide. Most patients with migraine discontinue medications due to inefficacy or adverse effects. Mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) may provide benefit. Objective: To determine if MBSR improves migraine outcomes and affective/cognitive processes compared with headache education. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial of MBSR vs headache education included 89 adults who experienced between 4 and 20 migraine days per month. There was blinding of participants (to active vs comparator group assignments) and principal investigators/data analysts (to group assignment). Interventions: Participants underwent MBSR (standardized training in mindfulness/yoga) or headache education (migraine information) delivered in groups that met for 2 hours each week for 8 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was change in migraine day frequency (baseline to 12 weeks). Secondary outcomes were changes in disability, quality of life, self-efficacy, pain catastrophizing, depression scores, and experimentally induced pain intensity and unpleasantness (baseline to 12, 24, and 36 weeks). Results: Most participants were female (n = 82, 92%), with a mean (SD) age of 43.9 (13.0) years, and had a mean (SD) of 7.3 (2.7) migraine days per month and high disability (Headache Impact Test-6: 63.5 [5.7]), attended class (median attendance, 7 of 8 classes), and followed up through 36 weeks (33 of 45 [73%] of the MBSR group and 32 of 44 [73%] of the headache education group). Participants in both groups had fewer migraine days at 12 weeks (MBSR: -1.6 migraine days per month; 95% CI, -0.7 to -2.5; headache education: -2.0 migraine days per month; 95% CI, -1.1 to -2.9), without group differences (P = .50). Compared with those who participated in headache education, those who participated in MBSR had improvements from baseline at all follow-up time points (reported in terms of point estimates of effect differences between groups) on measures of disability (5.92; 95% CI, 2.8-9.0; P < .001), quality of life (5.1; 95% CI, 1.2-8.9; P = .01), self-efficacy (8.2; 95% CI, 0.3-16.1; P = .04), pain catastrophizing (5.8; 95% CI, 2.9-8.8; P < .001), depression scores (1.6; 95% CI, 0.4-2.7; P = .008), and decreased experimentally induced pain intensity and unpleasantness (MBSR group: 36.3% [95% CI, 12.3% to 60.3%] decrease in intensity and 30.4% [95% CI, 9.9% to 49.4%] decrease in unpleasantness; headache education group: 13.5% [95% CI, -9.9% to 36.8%] increase in intensity and an 11.2% [95% CI, -8.9% to 31.2%] increase in unpleasantness; P = .004 for intensity and .005 for unpleasantness, at 36 weeks). One reported adverse event was deemed unrelated to study protocol. Conclusions and Relevance: Mindfulness-based stress reduction did not improve migraine frequency more than headache education, as both groups had similar decreases; however, MBSR improved disability, quality of life, self-efficacy, pain catastrophizing, and depression out to 36 weeks, with decreased experimentally induced pain suggesting a potential shift in pain appraisal. In conclusion, MBSR may help treat total migraine burden, but a larger, more definitive study is needed to further investigate these results. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02695498.
2.
Circadian Rhythms, Metabolism, and Chrononutrition in Rodents and Humans.
Johnston, JD, Ordovás, JM, Scheer, FA, Turek, FW
Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.). 2016;7(2):399-406
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Chrononutrition is an emerging field that links the body’s metabolism to its endogenous circadian rhythm. It is now recognised that numerous circadian clocks are found within all major tissues and most cells of the body. This complex network of clocks influences a wide range of biological processes including neuronal, endocrine, metabolic and behavioural function. When there is a disruption in a single circadian clock, whole-organism homeostasis can be impacted, potentially resulting in the development of disease. This review explains the potential mechanisms by which circadian clocks influence biological processes through transgenic animal studies, and how they are being translated to human genetics and metabolomics. The principles of chrononutrition are clinically significant factors that should be considered when managing and treating metabolic disease, as well as maintaining health in the general population.
Abstract
Chrononutrition is an emerging discipline that builds on the intimate relation between endogenous circadian (24-h) rhythms and metabolism. Circadian regulation of metabolic function can be observed from the level of intracellular biochemistry to whole-organism physiology and even postprandial responses. Recent work has elucidated the metabolic roles of circadian clocks in key metabolic tissues, including liver, pancreas, white adipose, and skeletal muscle. For example, tissue-specific clock disruption in a single peripheral organ can cause obesity or disruption of whole-organism glucose homeostasis. This review explains mechanistic insights gained from transgenic animal studies and how these data are being translated into the study of human genetics and physiology. The principles of chrononutrition have already been demonstrated to improve human weight loss and are likely to benefit the health of individuals with metabolic disease, as well as of the general population.
3.
Nighttime snacking reduces whole body fat oxidation and increases LDL cholesterol in healthy young women.
Hibi, M, Masumoto, A, Naito, Y, Kiuchi, K, Yoshimoto, Y, Matsumoto, M, Katashima, M, Oka, J, Ikemoto, S
American journal of physiology. Regulatory, integrative and comparative physiology. 2013;304(2):R94-R101
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Night eating syndrome (NES) is defined by night time eating (25% or more of the total energy of the day is consumed after the evening meal or by waking up in the middle of the night to eat at least three times per week). Research suggests that it is associated with obesity and a higher BMI. Those with NES may have higher glucose and insulin levels, and lower levels of ghrelin during the night compared to those without NES. This randomised crossover study aimed to explore the impact of nighttime eating on energy, glucose and lipid metabolism in normal weight young women. Participants were asked to either complete a 2 week nighttime snacking intervention or a daytime snacking intervention. The snack represented 10% of the average energy requirement (1950 k/cal per day) with a protein:fat:carbohydrate ratio of 5:50:45. The study found no impact of nighttime snacking on body weight, energy expenditure or glucose metabolism compared to daytime snacking. However, it did find a decrease in fat oxidation and increases in total and LDL cholesterol. Hunger levels before lunch were also higher during the nighttime snacking intervention.
Abstract
The increase in obesity and lipid disorders in industrialized countries may be due to irregular eating patterns. Few studies have investigated the effects of nighttime snacking on energy metabolism. We examined the effects of nighttime snacking for 13 days on energy metabolism. Eleven healthy women (means ± SD; age: 23 ± 1 yr; body mass index: 20.6 ± 2.6 kg/m(2)) participated in this randomized crossover trial for a 13-day intervention period. Subjects consumed a specified snack (192.4 ± 18.3 kcal) either during the daytime (10:00) or the night time (23:00) for 13 days. On day 14, energy metabolism was measured in a respiratory chamber without snack consumption. An oral glucose tolerance test was performed on day 15. Relative to daytime snacking, nighttime snacking significantly decreased fat oxidation (daytime snacking: 52.0 ± 13.6 g/day; nighttime snacking: 45.8 ± 14.0 g/day; P = 0.02) and tended to increase the respiratory quotient (daytime snacking: 0.878 ± 0.022; nighttime snacking: 0.888 ± 0.021; P = 0.09). The frequency of snack intake and energy intake, body weight, and energy expenditure were not affected. Total and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol significantly increased after nighttime snacking (152 ± 26 mg/dl and 161 ± 29 mg/dl; P = 0.03 and 76 ± 20 mg/dl and 83 ± 24 mg/dl; P = 0.01, respectively), but glucose and insulin levels after the glucose load were not affected. Nighttime snacking increased total and LDL cholesterol and reduced fat oxidation, suggesting that eating at night changes fat metabolism and increases the risk of obesity.