Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T21:23:53.718Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Appetite during consumption of enteral formula as a sole source of nutrition: the effect of supplementing pea-fibre and fructo-oligosaccharides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 March 2007

Kevin Whelan ,
Loukia Efthymiou ,
Patricia A. Judd ,
Victor R. Preedy  and
Moira A. Taylor
Kevin Whelan*
Affiliation:
Nutritional Sciences Research Division, King's College London, 150 Stamford Street, London SE1 9NH, UK
Loukia Efthymiou
Affiliation:
Nutritional Sciences Research Division, King's College London, 150 Stamford Street, London SE1 9NH, UK
Patricia A. Judd
Affiliation:
Lancashire School of Health and Postgraduate Medicine, Harrington Building, University of Central Lancashire, Preston PRI 2HE, UK
Victor R. Preedy
Affiliation:
Nutritional Sciences Research Division, King's College London, 150 Stamford Street, London SE1 9NH, UK
Moira A. Taylor
Affiliation:
School of Biomedical Sciences, Medical School, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK
*
*Corresponding author: Dr Kevin Whelan, fax +44 (0)20 78 48 41 85, email [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Liquid enteral formulas are commonly used as a sole source of nutritional support of patients in hospital and community settings. Their effect on appetite has important consequences for dietary management of such patients and is likely to be affected by the formula composition. The aim of the present study was to compare appetite within healthy subjects consuming both a standard formula and one supplemented with pea-fibre (10g/l) and fructo-oligosaccharide (FOS; 5g/l) as a sole source of nutrition. Eleven healthy subjects consumed a standard formula or a pea-fibre/FOS formula as a sole source of nutrition for 14d in a double-blind, cross-over trial. Appetite was recorded using standard 100mm lines anchored at each end by a phrase denoting the most extreme appetite sensation. Consumption of the pea-fibre/FOS formula resulted in higher mean fullness (46 v.37mm, P=0·035), minimum fullness (13 v. 9mm, P=0·024) and minimum satiety (12 v. 8mm, P=0·012) compared to the standard formula. As there were no differences in macronutrient intake between formulas, these differences are likely to be due to supplementation with pea-fibre and FOS. The effect on appetite of the composition of an enteral formula, both with respect to nutrient content and functional components such as pea-fibre and FOS, may be an important aspect to consider in the dietary management of patients consuming enteral formula as a sole source of nutrition.

Keywords

Enteral nutritionAppetiteFibreFructo-oligosaccharidesHungerPrebiotics
Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 96 , Issue 2 , August 2006 , pp. 350 - 356
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 2006

References

Anderson, GH & Woodend, DEffect of glycemic carbohydrates on short-term satiety and food intake. Nutr Rev (2003) 61, S17–S26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bell, EA, Roe, LS & Rolls, BJSensory-specific satiety is affected more by volume than by energy content of a liquid food. Physiol Behav (2003) 78, 593–600.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bouin, M, Savoye, G, Herve, S, Hellot, MF, Denis, P & Ducrotte, PDoes the supplementation of the formula with fibre increase the risk of gastro-oesophageal reflux during enteral nutrition? A human study. Clin Nutr (2001) 20, 307–312.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cani, PD, Dewever, C & Delzenne, NMInulin-type fructans modulate gastrointestinal peptides involved in appetite regulation (glucagon-like peptide-1 and ghrelin) in rats. Br J Nutr (2004) 92, 521–526.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Graaf, C, Blom, WA, Smeets, PA, Stafleu, A & Hendriks, HFBiomarkers of satiation and satiety. Am J Clin Nutr (2004) 79, 946–961.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delzenne, NM, Cani, PD, Daubioul, C & Neyrinck, AMImpact of inulin and oligofructose on gastrointestinal peptides. Br J Nutr (2005) 93, S157–S161.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Department of Health Dietary Reference Values for Food Energy and Nutrients for the United Kingdom London: HMSO (1991).Google Scholar
Flint, A, Raben, A, Blundell, JE & Astrup, AReproducibility, power and validity of visual analogue scales in assessment of appetite sensations in single test meal studies. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord (2000) 24, 38–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
French, SJ & Read, NWEffect of guar gum on hunger and satiety after meals of differing fat content: relationship with gastric emptying. Am J Clin Nutr (1994) 59, 87–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hofman, Z, van Drunen, JD, de Later, C & Kuipers, HThe effect of different nutritional feeds on the postprandial glucose response in healthy volunteers and patients with type II diabetes. Eur J Clin Nutr (2004) 58, 1553–1556.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Howarth, NC, Saltzman, E, McCrory, MA, Greenberg, AS,Dwyer, J, Ausman, L, Kramer, DG & Roberts, SBFermentable and nonfermentable fiber supplements did not alter hunger, satiety or body weight in a pilot study of men and women consuming selfselected diets. J Nutr (2003) 133, 3141–3144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, NA, Lluch, A, Stubbs, RJ & Blundell, JEHigh dose exercise does not increase hunger or energy intake in free living males. Eur J Clin Nutr (1997) 51, 478–483.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liljeberg, HG, Lonner, CH & Bjorck, IMSourdough fermentation or addition of organic acids or corresponding alts to bread improves nutritional properties of starch in healthy humans. J Nutr (1995) 125, 1503–1511.Google ScholarPubMed
Massimino, SP, McBurney, MI, Field, CJ, Thomson, AB, Keelan, M, Hayek, MG & Sunvold, GDFermentable dietary fiber increases GLP-1 secretion and improves glucose homeostasis despite increased intestinal glucose transport capacity in healthy dogs. J Nutr (1998) 128, 1786–1793.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moody, GA & Mayberry, JFCan flavourings improve the palatability of a predigested diet? What patients with inflammatory bowel disease think: a short communication. Ital J Gastroenterol Hepatol (1998) 30, 237.Google ScholarPubMed
Padilla, GV, Grant, M, Wong, H, Hansen, BW, Hanson, RL, Bergstrom, N & Kubo, WRSubjective distresses of nasogastric tube feeding. J Parenter Enteral Nutr (1979) 3, 53–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pearce, CB & Duncan, HDEnteral feeding. Nasogastric, nasojejunal, percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy, or jejunostomy: its indications and limitations. Postgrad Med J (2002) 78, 198–204.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silk, DBA, Walters, ER, Duncan, HD & Green, CJThe effect of a polymeric enteral formula supplemented with a mixture of six fibres on normal human bowel function and colonic motility. Clin Nutr (2001) 20, 49–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sørensen, LB, Moller, P, Flint, A, Martens, M & Raben, AEffect of sensory perception of foods on appetite and food intake: a review of studies on humans. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord (2003) 27, 1152–1166.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Strader, AD & Woods, SCGastrointestinal hormones and food intake. Gastroenterology (2005) 128, 175–191.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stratton, RJSummary of a systematic review on oral nutritional supplement use in the community. Proc Nutr Soc (2000) 59, 469–476.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stratton, RJElucidating effective ways to identify and treat malnutrition. Proc Nutr Soc (2005) 64, 305–311.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stratton, RJ & Elia, MThe effects of enteral tube feeding and parenteral nutrition on appetite sensations and food intake in health and disease. Clin Nutr (1999) 18, 63–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stratton, RJ, Stubbs, RJ & Elia, MInterrelationship between circulating leptin concentrations, hunger, and energy intake in healthy subjects receiving tube feeding. J Parenter Enteral Nutr (1998) 22, 335–339.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stratton, RJ, Stubbs, RJ & Elia, MShort-term continuous enteral tube feeding schedules did not suppress appetite and food intake in healthy men in a placebo-controlled trial. J Nutr (2003) 133, 2570–2576.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stubbs, RJ, Hughes, DA, Johnstone, AM, Horgan, GW, King, N & Blundell, JEA decrease in physical activity affects appetite, energy and nutrient balance in lean men feeding ad libitum. Am J Clin Nutr (2004) 79, 62–69.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stubbs, RJ, Hughes, DA, Johnstone, AM, Rowley, E, Reid, C, Elia, M, Stratton, R, Delargy, H, King, N & Blundell, JEThe use of visual analogue scales to assess motivation to eat in human subjects: a review of their reliability and validity with an evaluation of new hand-held computerized systems for temporal tracking of appetite ratings. Br J Nutr (2000) 84, 405–415.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sturm, K, Parker, B, Wishart, J, Feinle-Bisset, C, Jones, KL, Chapman, I & Horowitz, MEnergy intake and appetite are related to antral area in healthy young and older subjects. Am J Clin Nutr (2004) 80, 656–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teahon, K, Pearson, M, Levi, AJ & Bjarnason, IPractical aspects of enteral nutrition in the management of Crohn's disease. J Parenter Enteral Nutr (1995) 19, 365–368.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wolf, BW, Chow, J, Snowden, MK & Garleb, KAMedical foods and fructo-oligosaccharides: a novel fermentable dietary fibre. In Oligosaccharides in Food and Agriculture, pp.118–134[Eggleston, G and Coté, GL, editors]. Washington, DC: American Chemical Society (2003).Google Scholar
Womble, LG, Wadden, TA, Chandler, JM & Martin, ARAgreement between weekly vs. daily assessment of appetite. Appetite (2003) 40, 131–135.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed