Type 2 diabetes is a significant heath concern in the United States. Approximately 95% of people with diabetes have type 2 diabetes.1  The majority of people with type 2 diabetes are overweight or obese.

Weight loss has been established as an important therapeutic goal for overweight or obese patients with diabetes. Meal replacement shakes and nutrition bars are simple and effective weight loss tools for overweight or obese people with diabetes. These products have shown advantages over self-selective weight loss diets.

This article outlines some of the advantages of using meal replacement shakes and nutrition bars as weight loss tools. In addition, it offers a brief review of the literature on the use of these products in overweight and obese people with type 2 diabetes.1 

The National Weight Control Registry (NWCR) is a program tracking > 10,000 individuals who have lost a significant amount of weight and kept it off for at least 1 year. The NWCR identifies and investigates the characteristics of individuals who have succeeded at long-term weight loss. Obesity researchers track the lifestyle habits of successful weight losers and the behavioral strategies they use to maintain their weight.2 

Behavioral strategy tools are important to help participants stay motivated and on a successful path to weight loss and maintenance. Food diaries, pedometers, smaller dinner plates, and meal replacement shakes and nutrition bars are examples of weight loss tools.2 

Meal replacement shakes and nutrition bars provide a mixture of protein, carbohydrate, and fat, along with added vitamins and minerals. The shakes come in liquid ready-to-drink or powder formulas that require mixing. They are designed to mimic a low-calorie meal or snack and to be easy and quick to consume. Meal replacement shakes and nutrition bars have grown in popularity and variety in recent years and have proven to be a viable option to support weight loss.3 

There are many benefits to using shakes and nutrition bars in weight management. They provide individuals with a premeasured amount of food with a known calorie level, thus negating the need to measure or weigh meals or to estimate portion sizes. They are easy to transport and prepare and require no clean-up. Many individuals prefer to use these simple, convenient preparations instead of devoting time and energy to planning, preparing, and cleaning up after meals. Meal replacement shakes and nutrition bars allow dieters to have reduced contact with calorie-dense foods and involve less decision-making (e.g., consuming a shake or bar during a lunch break at work is easier than going to a restaurant and making a healthy food choice in the recommended portion size to meet weight loss goals).4  Additionally, such shakes and bars may further support weight loss via sensory-specific satiety. Sensory-specific satiety refers to the decreasing pleasure of tasting, smelling, or eating the same food or beverage until full or satisfied. Using monotonous meals or snacks (such as shakes or bars) triggers sensory-specific satiety, which may help individuals further decrease their caloric intake.5 

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) nutrition recommendations for diabetes acknowledge that meal replacement products when used once or twice a day to replace usual meals may result in significant weight loss. These recommendations caution, however, that to maintain weight loss, meal replacement therapy must be sustained indefinitely.6 

Keeping an accurate food diary is a recognized component of comprehensive weight loss programs.2  Several studies have found that obese individuals are more likely to underreport calorie intake when keeping records.7  Lichtman et al.8  found that obese individuals under-reported actual food intake by an average of 47%. Overweight and obese adolescents underreport calorie intake to a similar degree.9  Meal replacement shakes and nutrition bars may help dieters not only follow a weight control eating pattern, but also report more accurate calorie intake in their food diary.

Ditschuneit et al.10  assessed the long-term effects of an energy-restricted diet combined with one or two daily meal replacements on body weight and biomarkers of disease risk in 100 obese patients. Participants were randomly assigned to one of two dietary treatments. Both groups consumed 1,200–1,500 calories per day. One group was prescribed a diet in which all meals and snacks were prepared from self-selected, conventional foods. The other group was prescribed similar self-selected diets, except that two of the three main meals (breakfast, lunch, and dinner) were replaced with one of three meal replacement options (shakes, hot chocolate, or soup).

The researchers found that participants who replaced two out of three meals with meal replacement options and snacks with nutrition bars lost more weight than the comparison group choosing a self-selected, isocaloric eating plan using conventional foods. At 3 months, the group consuming meal replacement options and bars lost 7.8% of their initial body weight, whereas the group eating conventional foods lost 1.5% of their initial body weight.

After the initial intervention, both groups were asked to continue to follow a 1,200- to 1,500-calorie eating plan and to replace one meal with a meal replacement option and one snack with a bar each day. After 4 years, the initial meal replacement option/snack bar intervention group lost a mean 8.4% of their body weight, whereas the group initially selecting conventional foods lost 3.2% of their body weight.11  Both groups saw improvements in blood glucose and insulin levels, and the replacement option/snack bar group also had significant improvements in triglycerides and systolic blood pressure compared to baseline.11 

A meta- and pooling analysis of six randomized controlled trials (RCTs)3  showed that using meal replacement shakes for one to two meals per day during the weight loss phase and one meal per day during the maintenance phase produced a weight loss efficacy equivalent to or significantly greater than conventional reduced-calorie diets. Two of the six studies included subjects with type 2 diabetes. There was no difference in weight loss at 3 months between the individuals with diabetes and those without, although, at the 1-year follow-up, subjects with diabetes did not maintain their weight loss as well as their counterparts without diabetes. Despite experiencing less weight loss at 1 year, participants with type 2 diabetes decreased their A1C levels and reduced their need for diabetes medications. It was reported that participants who had a longer duration of diabetes and who used insulin lost less weight.

An RCT12  of 77 patients with diabetes compared the use of a soy-based meal replacement shake product for one to three meals per day to an individualized meal plan using ADA Exchange Lists. For both groups, a calorie target goal was based on subtracting 500 calories per day from estimated individual calorie needs. Fasting plasma glucose levels of the individuals randomized to the meal replacement plan were significantly reduced at 6 months, but not at 12 months, compared to participants on the individual diet plan. A1C levels were significantly lower and weight loss was significantly greater in the meal replacement group at 3 months, although there were no significant differences between groups at 1 year. Both groups maintained weight loss at 12 months, with a mean weight loss of 2.36 kg in the individual meal plan group and 4.35 kg in the meal replacement group.

The Look AHEAD (Action for Health in Diabetes) study13  is a 14-year multicenter RCT to assess whether weight reduction combined with physical activity can reduce cardiovascular disease morbidity and mortality in overweight or obese individuals with type 2 diabetes. More than 5,000 participants were randomly assigned to either an intensive lifestyle intervention or a usual care control group. The intensive lifestyle intervention was modeled on the landmark Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP).14  However, Look AHEAD set a more ambitious individual goal of losing ≥ 10% of initial body weight at year 1 (vs. 7% in the DPP) and ≥ 175 minutes of moderate-intensity physical activity per week (vs. ≥ 150 minutes per week in the DPP).15 

The control group received three group sessions per year with general information. The intervention group received weekly group or individual counseling on weight control for the first 6 months. For the remainder of the year, the intervention group continued to meet with a lifestyle counselor monthly and attended two group sessions per month. The nutrition intervention strategies focused on self-monitoring of food intake by calorie-counting and fat-gram goals along with aggressive use of meal replacements (mainly beverages and bars provided at no charge to participants) during the first 4 months. During months 5–12, participants were encouraged to continue to replace one meal and one snack per day with a meal replacement product).16  At 1 year, the intensive group lost 8.6% of their initial weight, whereas the control group lost only 0.7%. Greater self-reported physical activity was the strongest correlate of weight loss, followed by treatment attendance and consumption of meal replacements.16 

A study by Berkowitz et al.17  found similar results in healthy, overweight, and obese adolescents (80% female, 62% African American) in a 12-month RCT. Adolescents who were randomized to the intervention group and their parents attended group meetings for 4 months and were assigned to follow a 1,300- to 1,500-calorie meal plan of either conventional foods or three meal replacement shakes per day, along with a frozen prepackaged meal and five servings of fruits and vegetables. From month 4 to month 12, the intervention group consumed two meal replacements, five servings of fruits and vegetables, and a conventional meal daily, within the 1,300- to 1,500-calories-per-day limit. The meal replacement group lost significantly more weight at 4 months, but the benefits of the meal replacement plan were not maintained at the 12-month follow-up.

There is some concern among the general public that the carbohydrate (sugar) content of meal replacement shakes and bars may cause postprandial glucose excursions when consumed by people with diabetes, contributing to increased glucose variability. Postprandial glucose excursions have been linked to cardiovascular disease.18  Therefore, effective management of diabetes should also include control of peak postprandial glucose levels to the current target recommendation of ≤ 180 mg/dl.19 

Two small studies have examined the postprandial effects of meal replacement shakes.20,21  Fonda et al.20  evaluated the use of three meal replacement shakes in people with type 2 diabetes who were not taking insulin or insulin secretagogues. Various formulations of shake products were compared, including a diabetes-specific formula, a soy-based weight loss formula, and a fiber-containing formula. The volume of beverages was adjusted to include 50 g of carbohydrate. Subjects consumed each of the beverages after an overnight fast in random sequence, 1 week apart, before taking any oral diabetes medications.

Table 1.

Tips for Counseling Patients Who Would Like to Use Meal Replacement Shakes or Nutrition Bars for Weight Loss

Tips for Counseling Patients Who Would Like to Use Meal Replacement Shakes or Nutrition Bars for Weight Loss
Tips for Counseling Patients Who Would Like to Use Meal Replacement Shakes or Nutrition Bars for Weight Loss
Table 2.

Selecting Meal Replacement Shakes and Nutrition Bars19,22 

Selecting Meal Replacement Shakes and Nutrition Bars19,22
Selecting Meal Replacement Shakes and Nutrition Bars19,22

The study found that the increase in postprandial glucose was significantly different with the diabetes-specific shake, which had the largest quantity of sugar alcohol. This product yielded the lowest mean rise in blood glucose and smallest percentage of subjects above the recommended postprandial glucose upper limit 2 hours after consuming the shake. The other two formulations had less favorable postprandial profiles. It was proposed that the shake with a higher sugar alcohol content may be absorbed more slowly than sucrose and, therefore, may have resulted in a slower increase in postprandial glucose levels.

Another study21  randomly assigned 57 subjects with type 2 diabetes to either a meal replacement shake containing lactose, fructose, and sucrose; a shake product containing lactose and oligosaccharides; or an individualized reduced-calorie eating plan of regular food for 12 weeks. Individuals following the two shake plans were instructed to replace two meals per day with shakes and to eat one sensible, portion-controlled meal per day. Weight loss was greater in the shake groups (6.4 and 6.7% of body weight, respectively) than in the conventional diet group (4.9% of body weight). Fasting glucose, LDL cholesterol, and total cholesterol levels were significantly reduced in the meal replacement groups compared to the conventional diet group.

These meal replacement products have some limitations, however. A vital part of a comprehensive weight management program is learning to recognize and eat smaller portions at meals and snacks. Relying on replacement products too heavily may hinder this learning process. Consuming daily meal replacement shakes and nutrition bars over time can become monotonous for individuals who prefer a large variety in food texture and taste. In addition, some individuals may not tolerate shake products that are formulated with sugar alcohols. The most common side effects reported are bloating and diarrhea.

Studies have demonstrated the benefits of using meal replacement shakes and nutrition bars for weight loss. These products can be used safely by individuals with diabetes and may provide options for those desiring weight loss. Health care professionals can advise their patients with diabetes that such meal replacement products may be considered a potentially useful weight management tool to improve outcomes in conjunction with conventional weight loss plans. Tips for successfully counseling patients and assisting them in selecting meal replacement shakes and nutrition bars are included in Tables 1 and 2.

1.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion
:
Diabetes report card, 2012 [article online]
. Available from www.cdc.gov/diabetes/pubs/pdf/DiabetesReportCard.pdf.
Assessed 1 August 2012
2.
National Weight Control Registry
:
NWCR facts [article online]
. Available from www.nwcr.ws/Research/default.htm.
Accessed 1 August 2012
3.
Heymsfield
SB
,
Van Mierlo
CA
,
Van Der Knaap
HC
,
Heo
M
,
Frier
HI
:
Weight management using a meal replacement strategy: meta and pooling analysis from six studies
.
Int J Obes
27
:
537
549
,
2003
4.
Tsai
AG
,
Wadden
TA
:
The evolution of very-low-calorie diets: an update and meta analysis
.
Obesity
14
:
1283
1293
,
2006
5.
Raynor
HA
,
Niemeier
HM
,
Wing
RR
:
Effect of limiting snack food variety on long-term sensory-specific satiety and monotony during obesity treatment
.
Eat Behav
7
:
1
14
,
2006
6.
American Diabetes Association
:
Nutrition recommendations and interventions for diabetes [Position Statement]
.
Diabetes Care
31
:
S61
S78
,
2008
7.
Schoeller
DA
:
How accurate is self-reported dietary energy intake?
Nutr Rev
48
:
373
379
,
1990
8.
Lichtman
SW
,
Pisarska
K
,
Berman
ER
,
Pestone
M
,
Dowling
H
,
Offenbacher
E
,
Weisel
H
,
Heshka
S
,
Matthews
DE
,
Heymsfield
SB
:
Discrepancy between self-reported and actual calorie intake and exercise in obese subjects
.
N Engl J Med
327
:
1893
1898
,
1992
9.
Bandini
LG
,
Schoeller
DA
,
Cyr
HN
,
Dietz
WH
:
Validity of reported energy intake in obese and nonobese adolescents
.
Am J Clin Nutr
52
:
421
425
,
1990
10.
Ditschuneit
HH
,
Flechtner-Mors
M
,
Johnson
TD
,
Adler
G
:
Metabolic and weight loss effects of dietary intervention in obese patients
.
Am J Clin Nutr
69
:
198
204
,
1999
11.
Flechtner-Mors
M
,
Ditschuneit
H
,
Johnson
T
,
Suchard
M
,
Adler
G
:
Metabolic and weight loss effects of long-term intervention in obese patients: four-year results
.
Obes Res
8
:
399
402
,
2000
12.
Li
Z
,
Saltsman
P
,
DeShields
S
,
Bellman
M
,
Thames
G
,
Liu
Y
,
Wang
H-J
,
Elashoff
R
,
Heber
D
:
Long-term efficacy of soy-based meal replacements vs. an individual diet plan in obese type 2 DM patients: relative effects on weight loss, metabolic parameters, and C-reactive protein
.
Eur J Clin Nutr
59
:
411
418
,
2005
13.
Pi-Sunyer
X
,
Blackburn
G
,
Brancati
FL
:
Reduction in weight and cardiovascular disease risk factors in individuals with type 2 diabetes: one-year results of the Look AHEAD trial
.
Diabetes Care
30
:
1374
1383
,
2007
14.
Knowler
WC
,
Barrett-Connor
E
,
Fowler
SE
,
Hamman
RF
,
Lachin
JM
,
Walker
EA
,
Nathan
DM
DPP Research Group
:
Reduction in the incidence of type 2 diabetes with lifestyle intervention or metformin
.
N Engl J Med
346
:
393
403
,
2002
15.
Delahanty
LM
,
Nathan
DM
:
Implications of the Diabetes Prevention Program and Look AHEAD clinical trials for lifestyle interventions
.
J Am Diet Assoc
108
(
Suppl. 1
):
S66
S72
,
2008
16.
Wadden
TA
,
West
DS
,
Neiberg
RH
,
Wing
RR
,
Ryan
DH
,
Johnson
KC
,
Foreyt
JP
,
Hill
JO
,
Trence
DL
,
Vitolins
MZ
:
One-year weight losses in the Look AHEAD study: factors associated with success
.
Obesity
17
:
713
722
,
2009
17.
Berkowitz
RI
,
Wadden
TA
,
Gehrman
CA
,
Bishop-Gilyard
CT
,
Moore
RH
,
Womble
LG
,
Cronquist
JL
,
Trumpikas
NL
,
Levit Katz
LE
,
Xanthopoulos
MS
:
Meal replacements in the treatment of adolescent obesity: a randomized controlled trial
.
Obesity
19
:
1193
1199
,
2011
18.
Cavalot
F
,
Petrelli
A
,
Traversa
M
,
Bonomo
K
,
Fiora
E
,
Conti
M
,
Anfossi
G
,
Costa
G
,
Trovati
M
:
Postprandial blood glucose is a stronger predictor of cardiovascular events than fasting blood glucose in type 2 diabetes mellitus, particularly in women: lessons from the San Luigi Gonzaga diabetes study
.
J Clin Endocrinol Metab
91
:
813
819
,
2006
19.
American Diabetes Association
:
Standards of medical care in diabetes—2013
.
Diabetes Care
36
(
Suppl. 1
):
S11
S66
,
2013
20.
Fonda
SJ
,
Jain
A
,
Vigersky
RA
:
A head to head comparison of the postprandial effects of 3 meal replacement beverages among people with type 2 diabetes
.
Diabetes Educ
36
:
793
800
,
2010
21.
Yip
I
,
Go
VL
,
DeShields
S
,
Saltsman
P
,
Bellman
M
,
Thames
G
,
Murray
S
,
Wang
HJ
,
Elashoff
R
,
Heber
D
:
Liquid meal replacements and glycemic control in obese type 2 diabetes patients
.
Obes Res
9
(
Suppl. 4
):
S341
S347
,
2001
22.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
:
Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2010
. Available from http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/DGAs2010-PolicyDocument.htm.
Accessed 8 April 2013