No abstract

No abstract

PROVENCHER, VÉ RONIQUE, CATHERINE BÉ GIN, ANGELO TREMBLAY, LYNE MONGEAU, SONIA BOIVIN, AND SIMONE LEMIEUX. Short-term effects of a "Health-At-Every-Size" approach on eating behaviors and appetite ratings. Obesity. 2007;15:957-966. Objective: To assess the effects of a "Health-At-EverySize" (HAES) intervention on eating behaviors and appetite ratings in 144 premenopausal overweight women. Research Methods and Procedures: Women were randomly assigned to one of the 3 groups: HAES group, social support (SS) group, and control group (N ϭ 48 in each group). Interventions were conducted over a 4-month period, and measurements were taken before and after this period. Eating behaviors (cognitive dietary restraint, disinhibition, and susceptibility to hunger) were evaluated by the Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire. Appetite ratings (desire to eat, hunger, fullness, and prospective food consumption) were assessed by visual analogue scales before and after a standardized breakfast. Results: More important decreases in susceptibility to hunger and external hunger were observed in the HAES group when compared with the SS group (p ϭ 0.05, for susceptibility to hunger) and the control group (p ϭ 0.02 and p ϭ 0.005, for susceptibility to hunger and external hunger, respectively). In addition, women from the HAES group had more important decreases in postprandial area under the curve for desire to eat (p ϭ 0.02) and hunger (p ϭ 0.04) when compared with the control group. The change in the desire to eat noted in the HAES group was also different from the one observed in SS group (p ϭ 0.02). Women from the HAES group experienced significant weight loss at 4 months (Ϫ1.6 Ϯ 2.5 kg, p Ͻ 0.0001), which did not differ significantly from the SS and control groups (p ϭ 0.09). An increase in flexible restraint was significantly related to a greater weight loss in both HAES and SS groups (r ϭ Ϫ0.39, p Ͻ 0.01; and r ϭ Ϫ0.37, p Ͻ 0.05, respectively). A decrease in habitual susceptibility to disinhibition was also associated with a greater weight loss in HAES and control groups (r ϭ 0.31, p Ͻ 0.05; and r ϭ 0.44, p Ͻ 0.05, respectively). Discussion: These results suggest that a HAES intervention could have significant effects on eating behaviors and appetite ratings in premenopausal overweight women, when compared with an SS intervention or a control group.