Lisa Engel1, Helen Lindner2. 1. Diabetes Australia-Victoria, Melbourne, Australia (Ms Engel) 2. The School of Psychological Science, La Trobe University, Victoria, Australia (Dr Lindner)
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of using a pedometer on time spent walking, in sedentary and overweight adults with type 2 diabetes participating in acoaching intervention. It was hypothesized that participants using a pedometer would spend more time walking than would nonpedometer participants. Method A sample of 57 men and women with a mean age of 62 years participated in a randomized controlled trial in a community setting. Participants were allocated to either a pedometer and coaching (intervention) group or a coaching-only (control) group. Coaching for both groups involved education, goal setting, and supportive/motivational strategies to increase time spent walking. The duration of the study was 6 months, with blood pressure, glycosylated hemoglobin, anthropometric, and fitness measurements assessed at baseline and at 3-month intervals. RESULTS: A repeated-measures analysis of variance indicated that the coaching-only group spent significantly more time walking than did the pedometer group. However, when an analysis of covariance with all the other variables as covariates was performed, group membership had no influence on time spent walking. Significant reductions in waist circumference and weight were achieved for both groups from baseline to 6 months. Cardiovascular fitness also increased significantly for both groups. CONCLUSION: The study demonstrated that previously sedentary older adults with type 2 diabetes, supported with a coaching intervention, were able to achieve the physical activity targets known to be beneficial to health. However, using a pedometer added no further benefit. Further research on the impact of specific coaching strategies in diabetes management is warranted.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of using a pedometer on time spent walking, in sedentary and overweight adults with type 2 diabetes participating in a coaching intervention. It was hypothesized that participants using a pedometer would spend more time walking than would nonpedometer participants. Method A sample of 57 men and women with a mean age of 62 years participated in a randomized controlled trial in a community setting. Participants were allocated to either a pedometer and coaching (intervention) group or a coaching-only (control) group. Coaching for both groups involved education, goal setting, and supportive/motivational strategies to increase time spent walking. The duration of the study was 6 months, with blood pressure, glycosylated hemoglobin, anthropometric, and fitness measurements assessed at baseline and at 3-month intervals. RESULTS: A repeated-measures analysis of variance indicated that the coaching-only group spent significantly more time walking than did the pedometer group. However, when an analysis of covariance with all the other variables as covariates was performed, group membership had no influence on time spent walking. Significant reductions in waist circumference and weight were achieved for both groups from baseline to 6 months. Cardiovascular fitness also increased significantly for both groups. CONCLUSION: The study demonstrated that previously sedentary older adults with type 2 diabetes, supported with a coaching intervention, were able to achieve the physical activity targets known to be beneficial to health. However, using a pedometer added no further benefit. Further research on the impact of specific coaching strategies in diabetes management is warranted.
Authors: David M Williams; Charles E Matthews; Candace Rutt; Melissa A Napolitano; Bess H Marcus Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2008-07 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Caroline R Richardson; Tiffany L Newton; Jobby J Abraham; Ananda Sen; Masahito Jimbo; Ann M Swartz Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2008 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Ronald C Plotnikoff; Sarah A Costigan; Nandini D Karunamuni; David R Lubans Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) Date: 2013-01-29 Impact factor: 5.555