| Literature DB >> 22828963 |
Eivind Andersen1, Arne T Høstmark, Ingar Holme, Sigmund A Anderssen.
Abstract
High prevalence of type 2 diabetes (T2D) is seen in some immigrant groups in Western countries, particularly in those from the Indian subcontinent. Our aims were to increase the physical activity (PA) level in a group of Pakistani immigrant men, and to see whether any increase was associated with reduced serum glucose and insulin concentrations. The intervention was developed in collaboration with the Pakistani community. It used a social cognitive theory framework and consisted of structured supervised group exercises, group lectures, individual counselling and telephone follow-up. One- hundred and fifty physically inactive Pakistani immigrant men living in Oslo, Norway, were randomised to either a control group or an intervention group. The 5-month intervention focused on increasing levels of PA, which were assessed by use of accelerometer (Actigraph MTI 7164) recordings. Risk of diabetes was assessed by serum glucose and insulin concentrations determined in a fasted state, and after an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT). ANCOVA was used to assess differences between groups. There was a mean difference in PA between the two groups of 49 counts per minute per day, representing a 15 % (95 % CI = 8.7-21.2; P = 0.01) higher increase in total PA level in the intervention group than in the control group. Insulin values taken 2 h after an OGTT were reduced in the intervention group by 27 % (95 % CI = 18.9-35.0; P = 0.02) more than those in the control group. There were no differences in fasting or postprandial glucose values between the groups at the follow-up test. This type of intervention can increase PA and reduce serum insulin in Pakistani immigrant men, thereby presumably reducing their risk of T2D.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 22828963 PMCID: PMC3543607 DOI: 10.1007/s10903-012-9686-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Immigr Minor Health ISSN: 1557-1912
Fig. 1The flow of participants through the trial
Overview of the intervention components, the behaviour change strategies and the targeted constructs
| Intervention component | Dose | Description | Behaviour change strategy | Targeted construct |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Structured group exercise | 60 min 2/week | Participants could choose to attend one of five different exercise facilities in Oslo. The different exercise groups were led by an exercise physiologist. The exercise training programme was designed as a low-threshold activity. The sessions had the following structure: a 15 min warm-up with easy and fun games, 40 min of floor ball and/or football plus some strength exercises and a 5 min cool down. Seven participants did not attend any of the sessions (one trained by himself and six were not motivated) and two were injured at the first exercise session. The mean attendance was 60 % (range: 11–100 %) | Provide opportunities for PA Increase social support for PA Promote mastery learning through skill training Improve knowledge and skill to perform PA Promote positive outcomes Provide credible role models Social modelling | Environment Behavioural capability Expectancies Self-control Self-efficacy |
| Group lectures | 2 × 2 h | Major topics: What is PA? PA and health link; short- and long-term effects The harms of physical inactivity PA recommendations and how to achieve these Activity examples Setting small goals Identifying and reducing perceived barriers Making a PA plan Seeking social support Self-reward Both attendees and non-attendees received written summaries of the lecturers | Improve knowledge of PA options, including non-vigorous PA Improve knowledge of how to incorporate PA into a daily routine Enhance PA expectancies Improve goal setting Improve problem solving of PA barriers Improve social support for PA | Behavioural capability Expectancies Self-control Self-efficacy |
| Individual counselling sessions | 1 × 1 h | All participants completed this part of the intervention. The counselling was based on the concept that all advice must match the participants’ experiences of PA and their degree of motivation. Together with the participant, the primary goal was to find activities that could be implemented in a normal week, with the sum of these activities enabling them to reach the PA recommendations. After discussing activity options, the participants set the goals they wanted to achieve over the 5-month period. Finally, we discussed barriers by asking “What do you think can stop you from carrying out this activity plan?”, and the possible barriers, and solutions to them were discussed and written down | Identify opportunities for PA Improve knowledge and skill to perform PA Enhance goal setting Enhance problem solving Promote mastery Identify and problem solve barriers to PA | Environment Behavioural capability Self-control Self-efficacy |
| Phone call | 1 × 5–15 min | 3–5 weeks before the post-test, intervention participants were telephoned. The focus of this conversation was to discuss the activity plan, to make changes if necessary, and to encourage further efforts. All participants were reached within three attempts | Provide feedback on PA behaviour Reinforce problem solving Provide encouragement and help | Social support Self-control Self-efficacy |
Baseline values of the primary and secondary variables in each group
| Characteristic | Intervention group ( | Control group ( | Mean difference (95 % CI) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 35.7 (6.1) | 39.7 (9.2) | −3.9 (−6.6 to −1.2)‡ |
| Weight (kg) | 83.7 (12) | 84.1 (14.4) | −0.3 (−4.7–4.1) |
| Height (cm) | 174 (6.2) | 174 (6.2) | 0.6 (−1.3–2.7) |
| BMI (kg m−2) | 27.1 (3.2) | 27.4 (4.2) | −0.2 (−1.5–0.9) |
| Waist circumference (cm) | 98 (9) | 99 (11) | −1.1 (−4.6–2.3) |
| Total PA (CPM)a | 328 (138) | 281 (118) | 46 (3–89) |
| Inactive time (h day−1)a | 8.4 (1.6) | 8.9 (1.5) | −0.5 (−1.03–0.04) |
| MVPA (min day−1)a | 35 (21) | 28 (19) | 6.4 (−0.4–13) |
| Peak VO2 (mL kg−1 min−1)b | 33.9 (5.2) | 34.7 (6.5) | −0.7 (−3.4–1.9) |
| HbA1c (%) | 5.6 (0.60) | 5.7 (0.67) | −0.1 (−0.3–0.1) |
| Glucose (mmol/L) | 5.3 (0.7) | 5.5 (1.1) | −0.1 (−0.5–0.1 |
| Glucose-2 h (mmol/L) | 6.4 (2.2) | 7.6 (3.7) | −1.2 (−2.3 to −0.1) |
| Insulin (pmol/L) | 101 (53) | 107 (61) | −6 (−25–13) |
| Insulin-2 h (pmol/L) | 750 (607) | 865 (553) | −114 (−305–76) |
| C-peptide (pmol/L) | 993 (296) | 1,017 (346) | −23 (−131–83) |
| C-peptide-2 h (pmol/L) | 3,688 (1,348) | 4,057 (1,369) | −368 (−820–83) |
| HOMA-IR | 4.0 (2.3) | 4.2 (2.5) | −0.2 (−0.5–1.0) |
SD standard deviation, BMI body mass index, PA physical activity, MVPA moderate, vigorous and very vigorous intensity physical activity, HOMA-IR homeostasis model assessment—insulin resistance
a n = 59 and 83 for the control and the intervention groups, respectively
b n = 30 and 69 for the control and the intervention groups, respectively
‡ P value: 0.05
Changes between post and baseline measurements in the intervention and control groups
| Characteristic | Intervention group ( | Control group ( | Adjusted mean diff ±95 % CIa | Effect size |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Weight (kg) | −1.7 (0.2) | 0.1 (0.3) | −1.9 (−2.7 to −1.0) | −0.9 | <0.01 |
| BMI (kg m−2) | −0.5 (0.1) | 0.3 (0.1) | −0.8 (−1.1 to −0.5) | −1.00 | <0.01 |
| Waist circumference (cm) | −1.9 (0.4) | 1.7 (0.4) | −3.4 (−4.7 to −2.0) | −1.06 | <0.01 |
| Total PA level (CPM) | 65 (12) | 19 (13) | 49 (83–9) | 0.52 | 0.02 |
| Inactive time (min day−1) | −13 (11) | −14 (15) | 11 (−28–50) | 0.1 | 0.5 |
| MVPA (min day−1) | 13 (2) | 4 (2) | 6.4 (0.5–12) | 0.44 | 0.04 |
| Peak VO2 (mL kg−1 min−1)b | 7.3 (0.4) | 3.7 (0.8) | 3.6 (1.8–5.4) | 1.06 | <0.01 |
| HbA1c (%) | 0.06 (0.02) | 0.04 (0.03) | −0.003 (−0.1–0.1) | −0.02 | 0.9 |
| Glucose (mmol/L) | −0.14 (0.05) | −0.06 (0.1) | −0.1 (−0.4–0.1) | −0.09 | 0.3 |
| Glucose-2 h (mmol/L) | −0.6 (0.2) | −0.6 (0.3) | −0.2 (−0.9–0.3) | −0.1 | 0.4 |
| Insulin (pmol/L) | −15 (6.4) | −12 (5.8) | −5.5 (−24–12) | −0.1 | 0.5 |
| Insulin-2 h (pmol/L) | −257 (65) | −59 (55) | −196 (−385 to −7) | −0.51 | 0.04 |
| C-peptide (pmol/L) | −75 (36) | 9 (33) | −88 (−195–18) | −0.37 | 0.1 |
| C-peptide-2 h (pmol/L) | −573 (143) | −64 (153) | −445 (−886 to −6) | −0.42 | 0.04 |
| HOMA-IR | −0.7 | −0.5 | −0.1 (−0.6–0.9) | −0.12 | 0.7 |
SEM standard error of the mean, CI confidence interval, BMI body mass index, PA physical activity, MVPA moderate, vigorous and very vigorous intensity physical activity, HOMA-IR homeostasis model assessment—insulin resistance
aAdjusted for age and baseline differences
b n = 16 and 55 for the control and the intervention groups, respectively
Relations between changes in insulin-2 h and changes in PA variables and waist circumference
| Independent variables | β coefficient (±95 % CI) |
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Univariate analyses ( | ||||
| Change total PA (CPM) | −1.5 (−2.4 to −0.5) | −3.2 | 0.091 | 0.002 |
| Change inactive time (min day−1) | 1.6 (0.7–2.5) | 3.6 | 0.11 | <0.001 |
| Change MVPA (min day−1) | −4.5 (−10–1.7) | −1.4 | 0.01 | 0.1 |
| Change Peak VO2 (mL kg−1 min−1) | −10 (−40–18) | −0.7 | 0.009 | 0.4 |
| Change waist circumference (cm) | 16 (−5.4–38.0) | 1.4 | 0.019 | 0.14 |
| Multivariate analysesa ( | ||||
| Change total PA (CPM) | −1.4 (−2.4 to −0.4) | −3.0 | 0.10 | 0.003 |
| Change inactive time (min day−1) | 1.6 (0.72–2.5) | 3.7 | 0.13 | <0.001 |
CI confidence interval, MVPA moderate and vigorous intensity physical activity
aAdjusted for changes in waist circumference (cm)