| Literature DB >> 31952250 |
Marah Aqeel1, Anna Forster2, Elizabeth A Richards2, Erin Hennessy3, Bethany McGowan4, Anindya Bhadra5, Jiaqi Guo6, Saul Gelfand6, Edward Delp6, Heather A Eicher-Miller1.
Abstract
Type 2 diabetes is a major public health concern. Management of this condition has focused on behavior modification through diet and exercise interventions. A growing body of evidence has focused on temporality of dietary intake and exercise and potential effects on health. This review summarizes current literature that investigates the question "how does the timing of exercise relative to eating throughout the day effect postprandial response in adults?" Databases PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and SPORTDiscus were searched between March-May 2019. Experimental studies conducted in healthy adults (≥18 y) and those with type 2 diabetes were included. Full texts were examined by at least two independent reviewers. Twenty studies with a total of 352 participants met the inclusion criteria. The primary finding supports that exercise performed post-meal regardless of time of day had a beneficial impact on postprandial glycemia. There was insufficient evidence regarding whether timing of exercise performed pre- vs. post-meal or vice versa in a day is related to improved postprandial glycemic response due to inherent differences between studies. Future studies focusing on the investigation of timing and occurrence of meal intake and exercise throughout the day are needed to inform whether there is, and what is, an optimal time for these behaviors regarding long-term health outcomes.Entities:
Keywords: dietary intake; eating; exercise; glycemia; healthy; obese; overweight; postprandial response; timing; type 2 diabetes
Year: 2020 PMID: 31952250 PMCID: PMC7019516 DOI: 10.3390/nu12010221
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Figure 1Flow chart representing the review process.
Figure 2Flow chart representing selection of studies in the systematic review.
Summary of studies included in the systematic review.
| Citation | Study Length | Age (Years) Mean ± SD | Disease Condition | Intervention/ | Treatment Effects | Assessment | Glycemic Response | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PP Plasma Glucose | Glucose AUC | ||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Caron et al. [ | 2 days | 8 (5:3) | 24.25 ± NA | IDDM | Control (no exercise) vs. exercise post-breakfast | ↓ meal glycemic excursions | NA | Intervention day: Rise in glycemia was attenuated and remained constant during exercise at 190 ± 33 mg/dL; glycemia decreased to 163 ± 30 mg/dL just before lunch; after the second meal, all values from 300 min onward were significantly lower with exercise vs. control | Not reported |
| Erickson et al. [ | 2 days | 8 (5:3) | 60 ± 10.7 | Obesity/T2D | Control day (no exercise) vs. exercise post-breakfast | ↓ glucose | 2 h | Exercise post-breakfast: Significantly lower PG peak and decreasing glucose over time | Significant difference in average on 2 h iAUC |
| Huang et al. [ | 4 days | 26 (12:14) | 53.8 ± 8.6 | OW/T2D | No exercise (control) vs. exercise post-breakfast (EX30) vs. exercise 60 min post-breakfast (EX60) vs. exercise 90 min post-breakfast (EX90) | ↓ PPG | NA | Compared to control, declines in PG immediately post-exercise were larger in EX30, EX60, and EX90; capillary glucose decreased significantly after exercise in EX30, EX60, and EX90 | Not reported |
| Nelson et al. [ | 2 days | 16 (10:6) | Control group: 33.3 ± 2 | IDDM | Control (no exercise) vs. post-breakfast exercise | ↓ glycemia | 0, 30, 75, 95, 135, 180 min. | Post-breakfast exercise: Significant ↓ in glycemia | Not reported |
| Oberlin et al. [ | 4 days | 9 (4:5) | 60.1 ± 1 | Obesity/T2D | Control (no exercise) vs. pre-breakfast exercise | ↓ 24 h average blood glucose | 24 h avg glucose, 4 h glucose AUC, 2 h PPG | Pre-breakfast exercise significantly lowered avg. PG concentration during first 24 h period compared to control (5.98 vs. 6.62 mmol/L) | Main effect of exercise to lower PPG-AUC across all 6 meals compared to control |
| Poirier et al. [ | 2 days | 10 (10:0) | 54 ± 5 | Sedentary/T2D | Exercise pre-meal vs. post-breakfast exercise | ↓ plasma glucose (post-meal exercise) | 2 h | Mean decrease in PG concentration was 4.8 ± 1.9 mmol/L (60 ± 14% of baseline) vs. 1.0 ± 0.8 mmol/L (91 ± 6% of baseline) in post-meal vs. pre-meal exercise, respectively. | Not reported |
| Rasmussen et al. [ | 2 days | 7 (7:0) | 29 ± 4 | IDDM | Control (no exercise) vs. post-early meal (11:30 a.m.) exercise | ↓ blood glucose | −30, 0, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 180 min | Post-meal exercise: Significantly lower PG response areas by 34% vs. control (638 vs. 492 mmol/L × 180 min) | Not reported |
| Ruegemer et al. [ | 4 days | 6 (3:3) | 30 ± 4 | IDDM | Control (no exercise) vs. pre-breakfast exercise vs. pre- meal (4:00 p.m.) exercise | ↑ plasma glucose (exercise pre-breakfast) | −20, −10, 0, 15, 30, 45, 60, 75, 90, 120, 180, 240, 300, 360 min | Significant hyperglycemic response to morning exercise; no difference between groups 4 h after meals | Not reported |
| Terada et al. [ | 5 days | 10 (8:2) | 60 ± 6 | Obesity/T2D | Control (no exercise) vs. pre-breakfast HIIE vs. post-breakfast HIIE vs. pre-breakfast MICE vs. post-breakfast MICE | ↓ PPG | 24 h mean interstitial glucose concentration, 1 h mean PPG | Compared to post-meal exercise, pre-meal condition significantly attenuated PP glycemic increments | Comparing all exercise conditions to control, pre-meal HIIE significantly lowered total post-meal iAUC |
| Farah et al. [ | 3 days | 10 (10:0) | 28.1 ± 10.7 | OW | Control (no exercise) vs. pre-breakfast vs. post-breakfast exercise | ↔ PPG | 7 h PPG | No difference in glycemic response between conditions | Not reported |
| Lunde et al. [ | 3 days | 11 (0:11) | 44 ± NA | Obesity/diabetes prone | Control (no exercise) vs. post-breakfast 20 min. walk vs. post-breakfast 40 min walk | ↓ PPG | 2 h PPG | PPG and PG peak value significantly decreased with increasing duration of slow post-breakfast walking | 2 h glucose iAUC decreased with increasing duration of slow post-meal walking |
| Høstmark et al. [ | 2 days | 39 | Trained young: 22.5 ± 0.5 | Sedentary and trained | Control vs. exercise post- breakfast | ↓ peak glucose value | NA | Exercise post-breakfast: Peak PG was lower than control | Not reported |
| Nygaard et al. [ | 3 days | 13 (0:13) | Not listed | Healthy | Control (no exercise) vs. post-breakfast 15 min. walk vs. post-breakfast 40 min walk | ↓ blood glucose | 15, 22.5, 30, 37.5, 45, 55, 65, 75, 90, 105, 120 min | Compared to control, peak PG value was 0.8 mmol/L lower (significant) in post-breakfast 40 min walk condition | Significant main effect of walking time on 2 h iAUC; participants with the largest 2 h PG iAUC on the control day demonstrated the greatest reduction in PPG response when walking 40 min post-breakfast |
|
| |||||||||
| Colberg et al. [ | 3 days | 12 (6:0) | 61.47 ± 2.7 | Obesity/T2D | Control day (no exercise) vs. exercise pre-dinner vs. exercise post-dinner | ↓ plasma glucose | 4 h | Exercise post-dinner: Significantly lower PG levels at the end of exercise compared to at the same time point when participants had exercised pre-dinner | Total glucose AUC over 4 h was not significantly different among trials |
| Heden et al. [ | 3 days | 13 (5:8) | 48.5 ± 11.9 | Obesity/T2D | No resistance exercise (control) vs. pre-dinner resistance exercise vs. post-dinner resistance exercise | ↓ glucose iAUC (exercise pre-meal) | NA | Not reported | Significant reduction in glucose iAUC by ~18% and 30% in pre- and post-dinner exercise, respectively |
| Li et al. [ | 2 days | 29 (22:7) | 51 ± 11.2 | T2D | Control (no exercise) vs. post-dinner exercise | ↓ PP hyperglycemia | 2 h PPG | Post-dinner exercise vs. control: Significant lowering in 2 h PPG spike (1.9 ± 1.3 vs. 2.7 ± 1.4 mmol/L), 2 h PP peak glucose (9.3 ± 1.6 vs. 10.3 ± 2.3 mmol/L), and 2 h PP mean glucose levels (8.2 ± 1.3 vs. 8.9 ± 2.0 mmol/L) | Post-dinner exercise: Glucose tAUC 1 h after exercise was significantly lower than control (493.9 ± 84.0 vs. 559.3 ± 130.5 mmol/L × 60 min) |
| Rees et al. [ | 1 week | 73 (33:40) | 63.5 ± 9.1 | Obesity/T2D | Control (no exercise) vs. pre-dinner walking | ↓ blood glucose | 24 h glucose, 2 h PPG | Exercise had no effect on PPG or 24 h glucose variability; significant reduction in PG concentration during walking in exercise condition vs. control (−1.56 mmol/L) | Not reported |
|
| |||||||||
| Francois et al. [ | 3 days | 9 (7:2) | 48 ± 6 | Obesity/insulin resistant T2D | Control (continuous exercise pre-dinner) vs. exercise snacking pre-mean meals (ES) vs. composite exercise snacking pre- main meals (CES) | ↓ mean PPG (post- dinner and breakfast) | 3 h PPG and mean PPG, 24 h glucose concentration | ES significantly attenuated mean 3 h PPG concentrations following breakfast (0.4 ± 1.0 mmol/L) and 24 h mean PG concentrations by 0.7± 0.6 mmol/L relative to baseline | Not reported |
| Manohar et al. [ | 3 days | 12 (5:7) | 37.7 ± 13.7 | Healthy | Control (no exercise) vs. post-meal exercise | ↓ PPG excursions | NA | Baseline CGM PG concentration lower with post-meal exercise vs. control (5.61 mmol/L vs. 5.58 mmol/L); peak CGM PG concentration lower with post-meal exercise vs. control (8.25 mmol/L and 11.99 mmol/L) | Post-meal exercise: iAUC was estimated to be significantly lower than control (4.5 mmol/L/270 min vs. 9.6 mmol/L/270 min), respectively |
| Reynolds et al. [ | 2 weeks | 41 (26:15) | 60 ± 9.9 | Obesity/T2D | 30 min walk at any time of day vs. 10 min walk post 3 main meals | ↓ PPG | 3 h | Significantly lower 3 h mean PG levels following evening meal with post-meal walking compared to conventional condition (−0.50 mmol/L) | Glucose iAUC was 12% lower in the post-meal compared to conventional condition |
Abbreviations: M (male); F (female); Avg (average); PP (postprandial); PG (plasma glucose); PPG (postprandial glucose); AUC (area under the curve); tAUC (total AUC); iAUC (incremental AUC); HIIE (high intensity interval exercise); MICE (moderate intensity continuous exercise); IDDM (insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus); OW (overweight); CGM (continuous glucose monitoring); ↑ (increase); ↓ (decrease); ↔ (no change).
Risk of bias assessment of included studies.
| Author [ref] | Random Sequence Generation | Allocation Concealment | Selective Reporting | Blinding | Incomplete Outcome Data | Other Bias | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Participants/personnel | Outcomes assessment | ||||||
| Caron et al. [ | U | L | L | L | U | L | L |
| Colberg et al. [ | U | L | L | L | U | U | L |
| Erickson et al. [ | H | L | L | L | U | L | L |
| Farah et al. [ | L | L | L | L | U | U | L |
| Francois et al. [ | U | L | L | L | U | L | L |
| Heden et al. [ | U | L | L | L | U | U | L |
| Høstmark et al. [ | H | L | L | L | U | U | L |
| Huang et al. [ | U | L | L | L | U | L | L |
| Li et al. [ | U | L | L | L | U | L | L |
| Lunde et al. [ | H | L | L | L | U | L | L |
| Manohar et al. [ | U | L | L | L | U | L | M |
| Nelson et al. [ | H | L | L | L | U | L | M |
| Nygaard et al. [ | U | L | L | L | U | L | L |
| Oberlin et al. [ | U | L | L | L | U | U | L |
| Poirier et al. [ | U | L | L | L | U | L | L |
| Rasmussen et al. [ | U | L | L | L | U | U | L |
| Rees et al. [ | L | L | L | L | U | L | L |
| Reynolds et al. [ | L | L | L | L | L | L | L |
| Ruegemer et al. [ | U | L | L | L | U | L | L |
| Terada et al. [ | L | L | L | L | U | U | L |
Abbreviations: H (high risk of bias); M (moderate risk of bias); L (low risk of bias); U (unclear risk of bias).