Cynthia Fritschi1, Hanjong Park2, Andrew Richardson3, Chang Park4, Eileen G Collins5, Robin Mermelstein6, Lauren Riesche3, Laurie Quinn3. 1. Department of Biobehavioral Health Science, University of Illinois at Chicago College of Nursing, Chicago, IL, USA fritschi@uic.edu. 2. College of Nursing Science, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, South Korea. 3. Department of Biobehavioral Health Science, University of Illinois at Chicago College of Nursing, Chicago, IL, USA. 4. University of Illinois at Chicago College of Nursing, Chicago, IL, USA. 5. Department of Biobehavioral Health Science, University of Illinois at Chicago College of Nursing, Chicago, IL, USA Research and Development, Edward Hines Jr., VA Hospital, Hines, IL, USA. 6. University of Illinois at Chicago Institute for Health Research and Policy, Chicago, IL, USA.
Abstract
UNLABELLED: Exercise and sedentary behavior have different physiologic effects, which have yet to be fully explained. Time spent in sedentary behavior has been associated with glucose intolerance in adults at risk for type 2 diabetes, but these data have come largely from cross-sectional studies that have not explored this relationship in adults with diabetes. The specific aim of this study was to examine the relationship between time spent in sedentary behavior and glucose levels in adults diagnosed with type 2 diabetes over 3-5 days. METHODS: Using continuous and concurrent data gathered from wrist accelerometry and a Continuous Glucose-Monitoring Sensor (CGMS), we conducted a longitudinal, descriptive study involving 86 patients with type 2 diabetes. RESULTS: More time spent in sedentary behavior was predictive of significant increases in time spent in hyperglycemia (B = 0.12, p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the relationship between time spent sedentary and time spent in hyperglycemia, as identified through our use of objective, continuous data collection methods for both sedentary behavior and glucose levels across multiple days (Actiwatch, CGMS). For patients with type 2 diabetes, these findings emphasize the need for the development of individualized interventions aimed at decreasing the amount of time spent in hyperglycemia by reducing sedentary time.
UNLABELLED: Exercise and sedentary behavior have different physiologic effects, which have yet to be fully explained. Time spent in sedentary behavior has been associated with glucose intolerance in adults at risk for type 2 diabetes, but these data have come largely from cross-sectional studies that have not explored this relationship in adults with diabetes. The specific aim of this study was to examine the relationship between time spent in sedentary behavior and glucose levels in adults diagnosed with type 2 diabetes over 3-5 days. METHODS: Using continuous and concurrent data gathered from wrist accelerometry and a Continuous Glucose-Monitoring Sensor (CGMS), we conducted a longitudinal, descriptive study involving 86 patients with type 2 diabetes. RESULTS: More time spent in sedentary behavior was predictive of significant increases in time spent in hyperglycemia (B = 0.12, p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the relationship between time spent sedentary and time spent in hyperglycemia, as identified through our use of objective, continuous data collection methods for both sedentary behavior and glucose levels across multiple days (Actiwatch, CGMS). For patients with type 2 diabetes, these findings emphasize the need for the development of individualized interventions aimed at decreasing the amount of time spent in hyperglycemia by reducing sedentary time.
Authors: Kong Y Chen; Sari A Acra; Karen Majchrzak; Candice L Donahue; Lemont Baker; Linda Clemens; Ming Sun; Maciej S Buchowski Journal: Diabetes Technol Ther Date: 2003 Impact factor: 6.118
Authors: Earl S Ford; Chaoyang Li; Guixiang Zhao; William S Pearson; James Tsai; James R Churilla Journal: Metabolism Date: 2010-01-13 Impact factor: 8.694
Authors: David W Dunstan; Jo Salmon; Neville Owen; Timothy Armstrong; Paul Z Zimmet; Timothy A Welborn; Adrian J Cameron; Terence Dwyer; Damien Jolley; Jonathan E Shaw Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2004-11 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Genevieve N Healy; David W Dunstan; Jo Salmon; Ester Cerin; Jonathan E Shaw; Paul Z Zimmet; Neville Owen Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2007-05-01 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: J Lennert Veerman; Genevieve N Healy; Linda J Cobiac; Theo Vos; Elisabeth A H Winkler; Neville Owen; David W Dunstan Journal: Br J Sports Med Date: 2012-10 Impact factor: 13.800
Authors: D W Dunstan; E L M Barr; G N Healy; J Salmon; J E Shaw; B Balkau; D J Magliano; A J Cameron; P Z Zimmet; N Owen Journal: Circulation Date: 2010-01-11 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Silvio E Inzucchi; Richard M Bergenstal; John B Buse; Michaela Diamant; Ele Ferrannini; Michael Nauck; Anne L Peters; Apostolos Tsapas; Richard Wender; David R Matthews Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2012-04-19 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Tao Huang; Qian Gu; Zhangyan Deng; Chilun Tsai; Yue Xue; Jimeng Zhang; Liye Zou; Zuosong Chen; Kun Wang Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-03-28 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Aye C Paing; Kathryn A McMillan; Alison F Kirk; Andrew Collier; Allan Hewitt; Sebastien F M Chastin Journal: Eur J Appl Physiol Date: 2019-11-08 Impact factor: 3.078
Authors: Andrew P Kingsnorth; Maxine E Whelan; James P Sanders; Lauren B Sherar; Dale W Esliger Journal: JMIR Mhealth Uhealth Date: 2018-05-03 Impact factor: 4.773