Lower Energy-Dense Ready Meal Consumption Affects Self-Reported Appetite Ratings with No Effect on Subsequent Food Intake in Women

Abstract

Slimming World (SW), a commercial weight management organisation, has designed a range of low energy-dense ready meals (LEDRMs) in line with their programme. This randomised crossover study compared commercially available equicaloric ready meals differing in energy density on satiety and food intake. It was hypothesised that the LEDRM would reduce energy intake (EI) whilst increasing fullness and reducing hunger compared to higher energy-dense ready meal (HEDRM, control). A total of 26 female participants (aged 18-65 years; body mass index of 28.8 ± 3.0 kg·m^-2) attended two test days. The participants ate a standard breakfast, and four hours later, ate either a LEDRM or HEDRM at lunch. EI was measured four hours later at an ad libitum tea. Satiety measurements were recorded throughout the day using visual analogue scales and a weighed food diary was completed for the remainder of the day. The results revealed that the LEDRM reduced hunger and increased fullness (both p < 0.001). There was no difference in EI at the evening meal between the ready meals (p > 0.05), however, during the whole LEDRM testing day, the participants consumed significantly less fat (7.1%) and saturated fat (3.6%) (both p < 0.01), but significantly more carbohydrates, sugars, fibre, protein, and salt (all p < 0.01). The results indicate that the participants felt more satiated after consuming ready meals of the same energy content but larger portion size. Despite no significant difference in short-term EI between the ready meals, the results indicated that the LEDRM produced beneficial subjective satiety responses and, therefore, can help to improve the nutritional content of meals i.e., reduce saturated fat consumption.

Keywords: appetite; energy density; food intake; ready meals; satiety.

Figure 1

Flow diagram illustrating participant recruitment.

Figure 2

Timeline of study protocol for both test days.

Figure 3

Mean (±standard deviation) for hunger (A), fullness (B), desire to eat (C), prospective consumption (D), thirst (E), and nausea (F) from VAS taken throughout the HEDRM test day (black) and the LEDRM test day (grey). Significance tested by analysis of variance (ANOVA) using baseline values as covariate. * Indicates significant difference between test meals.

Figure 4

Participant evaluation of the low-energy-dense ready meal (LEDRM) and high-energy-dense ready meal (HEDRM) for the following attributes: attractiveness, smell, texture, after taste, tastiness, eat again and pleasantness. Significance tested using paired samples t-test or Wilcoxon signed-rank test.

Figure 5

Mean energy intake (kcal) from breakfast, test lunch, buffet meal, and food diary during the low-energy-dense ready meal (LEDRM) test day and the high-energy-dense ready meal (HEDRM) test day.