The effectiveness of a targeted education intervention to increase protein intake in people with coronary heart disease: A pilot feasibility randomised controlled trial.

Low protein intake is prevalent in people with coronary heart disease (CHD) and is inadequately addressed in UK-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR). This pilot feasibility study aimed to identify whether targeted education increases protein intake in patients with CHD and low protein intake, compared with standard CR dietary education. People referred to CR with CHD (≥50 years) underwent anthropometric assessment, and completed a food diary, sit-to-stand test and three questionnaires (physical activity, sarcopenia screening, and nutrition knowledge). Participants with low protein intake (≤1.2 g/kg/day) were randomised to receive either extra protein education (intervention; PG) or standard education (control; CG), embedded within their usual six-week CR programme. At 6- and 12-weeks, outcome measures were repeated; 34 participants provided baseline data. Protein intake was inversely associated with waist circumference (r = -0.348). Twenty-seven participants (79%) with low protein intake were randomised to PG (n = 15) or CG (n = 12). At Week 6, the median (interquartile range) change in protein intake was 0.0 (-0.0, 0.3) and 0.4 (0.2, 0.5) g/kg/day in PG and CG, respectively (effect size 0.5). At Week 12, the change in protein intake was 0.0 (-0.0, 0.1) and -0.0 (-0.2, 0.2) g/kg/day in PG and CG, respectively (effect size 0.3). Effect sizes for all other variables were ≤0.4. The intervention appeared well-received by those who completed the study; however, changes to primary and secondary outcomes were minimal. Uptake to the study was low and attrition high, limiting the interpretation of efficacy and the implementation of a definitive trial.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
British Journal Of Nutrition
Published
2026-04-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007114526107235
Primary Topic
Nutritional Studies and Diet
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The effectiveness of a targeted education intervention to increase protein intake in people with coronary heart disease: A pilot feasibility randomised controlled trial.

Alasdair F. O’Doherty, Stuart Goodall, Emily James, Simon Nichols et al.
British Journal Of Nutrition
Nutritional Studies and Diet
article

The effectiveness of a targeted education intervention to increase protein intake in people with coronary heart disease: A pilot feasibility randomised controlled trial.

Alasdair F. O’Doherty, Stuart Goodall, Emily James, Simon Nichols, Rajiv Das, Rosiered Brownson-Smith, Estelle Rickelton
article en

Abstract

Low protein intake is prevalent in people with coronary heart disease (CHD) and is inadequately addressed in UK-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR). This pilot feasibility study aimed to identify whether targeted education increases protein intake in patients with CHD and low protein intake, compared with standard CR dietary education. People referred to CR with CHD (≥50 years) underwent anthropometric assessment, and completed a food diary, sit-to-stand test and three questionnaires (physical activity, sarcopenia screening, and nutrition knowledge). Participants with low protein intake (≤1.2 g/kg/day) were randomised to receive either extra protein education (intervention; PG) or standard education (control; CG), embedded within their usual six-week CR programme. At 6- and 12-weeks, outcome measures were repeated; 34 participants provided baseline data. Protein intake was inversely associated with waist circumference (r = -0.348). Twenty-seven participants (79%) with low protein intake were randomised to PG (n = 15) or CG (n = 12). At Week 6, the median (interquartile range) change in protein intake was 0.0 (-0.0, 0.3) and 0.4 (0.2, 0.5) g/kg/day in PG and CG, respectively (effect size 0.5). At Week 12, the change in protein intake was 0.0 (-0.0, 0.1) and -0.0 (-0.2, 0.2) g/kg/day in PG and CG, respectively (effect size 0.3). Effect sizes for all other variables were ≤0.4. The intervention appeared well-received by those who completed the study; however, changes to primary and secondary outcomes were minimal. Uptake to the study was low and attrition high, limiting the interpretation of efficacy and the implementation of a definitive trial.

British Journal Of Nutrition
University of Leicester (GB), Durham University (GB), Edinburgh Napier University (GB), Freeman Hospital (GB), Northumbria University (GB), NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre (GB), Sheffield Hallam University (GB), Newcastle University (GB)
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Nutritional Studies and Diet
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.