The effect of 4-h versus 6-h time restricted feeding on sleep quality, duration, insomnia severity and obstructive sleep apnea in adults with obesity
Sofia Cienfuegos, Kelsey Gabel, Faiza Kalam, Mark Ezpeleta, Vicky Pavlou, Shuhao Lin, Eric Wiseman, Krista A Varady
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Time restricted feeding (TRF) involves deliberately restricting the times during which energy is ingested. Preliminary findings suggest that 8-10-h TRF improves sleep. However, the effects of shorter TRF windows (4-6 h) on sleep, remain unknown. AIMS: This study compared the effects of 4-h versus 6-h TRF on sleep quality, duration, insomnia severity and the risk of obstructive sleep apnea. METHODS: = 49) were randomized into one of three groups: 4-h TRF (eating only between 3 and 7 p.m.), 6-h TRF (eating only between 1 and 7 p.m.), or a control group (no meal timing restrictions) for 8 weeks. RESULTS: < 0.001) similarly by 4-h TRF (-3.9 ± 0.4 kg) and 6-h TRF (-3.4 ± 0.4 kg), versus controls. Sleep quality, measured by the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), did not change by 4-h TRF (baseline: 5.9 ± 0.7; week 8: 4.8 ± 0.6) or 6-h TRF (baseline: 6.4 ± 0.8; week 8: 5.3 ± 0.9), versus controls. Wake time, bedtime, sleep duration and sleep onset latency also remained unchanged. Insomnia severity did not change by 4-h TRF (baseline: 4.4 ± 1.0; week 8: 4.7 ± 0.9) or 6-h TRF (baseline: 8.3 ± 1.2; week 8: 5.5 ± 1.1), versus controls. Percent of participants reporting obstructive sleep apnea symptoms did not change by 4-h TRF (baseline: 44%; week 8: 25%) or 6-h TRF (baseline: 47%; week 8: 20%), versus controls. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that 4- and 6-h TRF have no effect on sleep quality, duration, insomnia severity, or the risk of obstructive sleep apnea.