| Literature DB >> 23002086 |
Kristian Karstoft1, Kamilla Winding, Sine H Knudsen, Jens S Nielsen, Carsten Thomsen, Bente K Pedersen, Thomas P J Solomon.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility of free-living walking training in type 2 diabetic patients and to investigate the effects of interval-walking training versus continuous-walking training upon physical fitness, body composition, and glycemic control. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Subjects with type 2 diabetes were randomized to a control (n = 8), continuous-walking (n = 12), or interval-walking group (n = 12). Training groups were prescribed five sessions per week (60 min/session) and were controlled with an accelerometer and a heart-rate monitor. Continuous walkers performed all training at moderate intensity, whereas interval walkers alternated 3-min repetitions at low and high intensity. Before and after the 4-month intervention, the following variables were measured: VO(2)max, body composition, and glycemic control (fasting glucose, HbA(1c), oral glucose tolerance test, and continuous glucose monitoring [CGM]).Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23002086 PMCID: PMC3554285 DOI: 10.2337/dc12-0658
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Diabetes Care ISSN: 0149-5992 Impact factor: 19.112
Baseline characteristics and changes in VO2max, body composition, lipids, blood pressure, and glycemic control
Energy intake and expenditure and training data
Figure 1Subjects with type 2 diabetes were randomized to a CON (white bars), CWT (striated bars), or IWT group (black bars). Aerobic fitness (VO2max) (A), body mass (B), whole-body fat mass (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry) (C), and abdominal visceral adiposity (MRI) (D) were measured at baseline and after 4 months. Data are presented as mean Δ values (post − preintervention values) ± SEM. Statistical differences were analyzed by two-way repeated-measures ANOVA when comparing pre to post changes within groups (indicated by ***P < 0.001), and one-way ANOVA of Δ values when comparing differences between groups (indicated by a connecting line between bars; *P < 0.05 and **P < 0.01).
Figure 2Subjects with type 2 diabetes were randomized to a CON (white bars), CWT (striated bars), or IWT group (black bars). Intervention-induced changes in glycemic control were assessed by examining post − preintervention changes in the following variables: mean 48-h CGM glucose (A), minimum 48-h CGM glucose (B), and maximum 48-h CGM glucose (C). Data are presented as mean Δ values (post − preintervention values) ± SEM. Statistical differences were analyzed by two-way repeated-measures ANOVA when comparing pre to post changes within groups (indicated by *P < 0.05 and **P < 0.01), and one-way ANOVA of Δ values when comparing differences between groups (indicated by a connecting line between bars; **P < 0.01).