PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare 24-h and postprandial glucose responses to incremental intervals of standing (STAND), walking (WALK), and cycling (CYCLE) to a sit-only (SIT) condition. METHODS:Nine overweight/obese (body mass index = 29 ± 3 kg·m) adults (30 ± 15 yr) participated in this randomized crossover full-factorial study, with each condition performed 1 wk apart. STAND, CYCLE, and WALK intervals increased from 10 to 30 min·h (2.5 h total) during an 8-h workday. WALK (1.0 mph) and STAND were matched for upright time, and WALK and CYCLE were matched for energy expenditure (~2 METs). Continuous interstitial glucose monitoring was performed for 24 h to include the 8-h workday (LAB), after-work evening hours (EVE), and sleep (SLEEP). Three 2-h postprandial periods were also analyzed. Linear mixed models were used to test for condition differences. RESULTS: Compared with SIT (5.7 ± 1.0 mmol·L), mean 24-h glucose during STAND (5.4 ± 0.9 mmol·L) and WALK (5.3 ± 0.9 mmol·L) were lower, and CYCLE (5.1 ± 1.0 mmol·L) was lower than all other conditions (all P < 0.001). During LAB and EVE, mean glucose was lower for STAND, WALK, and CYCLE compared with SIT (P < 0.001). During SLEEP, the mean glucose for CYCLE was lower than all other conditions (P < 0.001). Compared with SIT, cumulative 6-h postprandial mean glucose was 5%-12% lower (P < 0.001) during STAND, WALK, and CYCLE, and 6-h postprandial glucose integrated area under the curve was 24% lower during WALK (P < 0.05) and 44% lower during CYCLE (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Replacing sitting with regular intervals of standing or light-intensity activity during an 8-h workday reduces 24-h and postprandial glucose. These effects persist during evening hours, with CYCLE having the largest and most sustained effect.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare 24-h and postprandial glucose responses to incremental intervals of standing (STAND), walking (WALK), and cycling (CYCLE) to a sit-only (SIT) condition. METHODS: Nine overweight/obese (body mass index = 29 ± 3 kg·m) adults (30 ± 15 yr) participated in this randomized crossover full-factorial study, with each condition performed 1 wk apart. STAND, CYCLE, and WALK intervals increased from 10 to 30 min·h (2.5 h total) during an 8-h workday. WALK (1.0 mph) and STAND were matched for upright time, and WALK and CYCLE were matched for energy expenditure (~2 METs). Continuous interstitial glucose monitoring was performed for 24 h to include the 8-h workday (LAB), after-work evening hours (EVE), and sleep (SLEEP). Three 2-h postprandial periods were also analyzed. Linear mixed models were used to test for condition differences. RESULTS: Compared with SIT (5.7 ± 1.0 mmol·L), mean 24-h glucose during STAND (5.4 ± 0.9 mmol·L) and WALK (5.3 ± 0.9 mmol·L) were lower, and CYCLE (5.1 ± 1.0 mmol·L) was lower than all other conditions (all P < 0.001). During LAB and EVE, mean glucose was lower for STAND, WALK, and CYCLE compared with SIT (P < 0.001). During SLEEP, the mean glucose for CYCLE was lower than all other conditions (P < 0.001). Compared with SIT, cumulative 6-h postprandial mean glucose was 5%-12% lower (P < 0.001) during STAND, WALK, and CYCLE, and 6-h postprandial glucose integrated area under the curve was 24% lower during WALK (P < 0.05) and 44% lower during CYCLE (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Replacing sitting with regular intervals of standing or light-intensity activity during an 8-h workday reduces 24-h and postprandial glucose. These effects persist during evening hours, with CYCLE having the largest and most sustained effect.
Authors: Sarah K Keadle; David E Conroy; Matthew P Buman; David W Dunstan; Charles E Matthews Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2017-08 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Elizabeth Hegedus; Sarah-Jeanne Salvy; Choo Phei Wee; Monica Naguib; Jennifer K Raymond; D Steven Fox; Alaina P Vidmar Journal: Obes Res Clin Pract Date: 2021-09-02 Impact factor: 5.214
Authors: Yue Liao; Karen M Basen-Engquist; Diana L Urbauer; Therese B Bevers; Ernest Hawk; Susan M Schembre Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2020-02-17 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Charlotte L Edwardson; Stuart J H Biddle; Alexandra Clarke-Cornwell; Stacy Clemes; Melanie J Davies; David W Dunstan; Helen Eborall; Malcolm H Granat; Laura J Gray; Genevieve N Healy; Gerry Richardson; Thomas Yates; Fehmidah Munir Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2018-09-14 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Miranda L Larouche; Sarah L Mullane; Meynard John L Toledo; Mark A Pereira; Jennifer L Huberty; Barbara E Ainsworth; Matthew P Buman Journal: Front Public Health Date: 2018-11-21
Authors: Charlotte L Edwardson; Tom Yates; Stuart J H Biddle; Melanie J Davies; David W Dunstan; Dale W Esliger; Laura J Gray; Benjamin Jackson; Sophie E O'Connell; Ghazala Waheed; Fehmidah Munir Journal: BMJ Date: 2018-10-10