TABLE 1.

Outcomes From Implementation of the MEP in People With Diabetes

StudyPopulation/Study Duration (Completion Rate)Interventions (Type of Study)Reported Dietary IntakeOutcome
Toobert, 2003 (11)n = 279 women with type 2 diabetes/ 6 months (88%)MLP vs. UC (RCT)Not reportedMLP vs. UC: A1C ↓ 0.4% vs. no change (SS); BMI ↓ 0.37 vs ↑ 0.2 kg/m2 (SS); lipids: NS changes
Esposito, 2009 (9)n = 215 people with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes/ 4 years (57%)Low-CHO (<50% kcal) MEP vs. LF diet (<30% kcal); 1,500 kcal/day for women, 1,800 kcal/day for men (RCT)MEP: CHO intake 41–44% kcal; LF: CHO intake 51–54% kcalMEP vs. LF (4-year): A1C ↓ 0.9 vs. ↓ 0.5% (SS); ↑ insulin sensitivity, ↑ HDL-C, ↓ TG, all SS; diabetes medications 40 vs. 70%, SS; no weight difference
Ellhayany, 2010 (10)n = 259 people with type 2 diabetes/ 12 months (75%)Low-CHO (35% kcal) MEP vs. Trad MEP (50–55% CHO) vs. 2003 ADA (50% CHO); 20 kcal/kg (RCT)Mean reported kcal similar (∼2,300 kcal); CHO: ADA 45.4%, Trad 45.2%, Low-CHO 41.9%Mean weight loss 8.3 kg (NS between groups); A1C: Low-CHO ↓ 2 vs. ADA ↓ 1.6% (SS); HDL ↑ 3.9 mg/dL (SS); TG and LDL-C: all SS ↓
Itsiopoulos, 2011 (12)n = 27 people with type 2 diabetes/2 weeks on each diet (100%)Ad libitum MEP vs. usual diet (crossover RCT)Not reportedMEP: A1C ↓ from 7.1 to 6.8% (SS); NS difference in weight and lipids
Toobert, 2011 (13)n = 280 Latina women with type 2 diabetes/ 24 months (61.4%)MLP (cultural adaptation of program in Toobert, 2003 (11) vs. UC (RCT)Not reportedMLP and UC: NS changes in A1C and CHD risk score
  • CHO, carbohydrate; HDL-C, HDL cholesterol; LDL-C, LDL cholesterol; LF, low fat; NS, nonsignificant; RCT, randomized clinical trial; SS, statistically significant; TG, triglycerides; Trad, traditional; UC, usual care.