Dataset Information

High-Intensity Interval Training Is Equivalent to Moderate-Intensity Continuous Training for Short- and Medium-Term Outcomes of Glucose Control, Cardiometabolic Risk, and Microvascular Complication Markers in Men With Type 2 Diabetes.

ABSTRACT: We sought to determine the efficacy of 12 weeks high-intensity interval training (HIIT), compared to moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) on glucose control, cardiometabolic risk and microvascular complication markers in men living with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Both modalities were combined with resistance training (RT). Additionally, the study aimed to determine the medium-term durability of effects. After a 12-week, thrice weekly, training intervention incorporating either MICT+RT (n = 11) or HIIT+RT (n = 12), the study concluded with a 6-month follow-up analysis. The middle-aged study participants were obese, had moderate duration T2D and were taking multiple medications including insulin, statins and beta-blockers. Participants, randomized via the method of minimization, performed MICT (progressing to 26-min at 55% maximum estimated workload [eWLmax]) or HIIT (progressing to two variations in which twelve 1-min bouts at 95% eWLmax interspersed with 1-min recovery bouts, alternated with eight 30-s bouts at 120% eWLmax interspersed with 2:15 min recovery bouts) under supervision at an exercise physiology facility. To account for fixed and random effects within the study sample, mixed-effect models were used to determine the significance of change following the intervention and follow-up phases and to evaluate group^*time interactions. Beyond improvements in aerobic capacity (P < 0.001) for both groups, both training modalities elicited similar group^*time interactions (P > 0.05) while experiencing benefits for glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c; P = 0.01), subcutaneous adiposity (P < 0.001), and heart rate variability (P = 0.02) during the 12-week intervention. Adiposity (P < 0.001) and aerobic capacity (P < 0.001) were significantly maintained in both groups at the 6-month follow-up. In addition, during the intervention, participants in both MICT+RT and HIIT+RT experienced favorable reductions in their medication usage. The study reported the inter-individual variability of change within both groups, the exaggerated acute physiological responses (using exercise termination indicators) that occurred during the interventions as well as the incidence of precautionary respite afforded in such a study sample. To reduce hyperglycaemia, and prevent further deterioration of cardiometabolic risk and microvascular complication markers (in both the short- and medium-term), future strategies that integrate the adoption and maintenance of physical activity as a cornerstone in the treatment of T2M for men should (cognisant of appropriate supervision) include either structured MICT+RT, or HIIT+RT. Clinical Trials Registration Number: ACTRN12617000582358 http://www.anzctr.org.au/default.aspx.

SUBMITTER: Wormgoor SG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6120973 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Poststroke guidelines recommend moderate-intensity, continuous aerobic training (MCT) to improve aerobic capacity and mobility after stroke. High-intensity interval training (HIT) has been shown to be more effective than MCT among healthy adults and people with heart disease. However, HIT and MCT have not been compared previously among people with stroke.The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility and justification for a definitive randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing HIT and MCT in people with chronic stroke.A preliminary RCT was conducted.The study was conducted in a cardiovascular stress laboratory and a rehabilitation research laboratory.Ambulatory people at least 6 months poststroke participated.Both groups trained 25 minutes, 3 times per week, for 4 weeks. The HIT strategy involved 30-second bursts at maximum-tolerated treadmill speed alternated with 30- to 60-second rest periods. The MCT strategy involved continuous treadmill walking at 45% to 50% of heart rate reserve.Measurements included recruitment and attendance statistics, qualitative HIT acceptability, adverse events, and the following blinded outcome variables: peak oxygen uptake, ventilatory threshold, metabolic cost of gait, fractional utilization, fastest treadmill speed, 10-Meter Walk Test, and Six-Minute Walk Test.During the 8-month recruitment period, 26 participants consented to participate. Eighteen participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to either the HIT group (n=13) or the MCT group (n=5). Eleven out of the 13 HIT group participants attended all sessions. Participants reported that HIT was acceptable and no serious adverse events occurred. Standardized effect size estimates between groups were moderate to very large for most outcome measures. Only 30% of treadmill speed gains in the HIT group translated into overground gait speed improvement.The study was not designed to definitively test safety or efficacy.Although further protocol optimization is needed to improve overground translation of treadmill gains, a definitive RCT comparing HIT and MCT appears to be feasible and warranted.

Project description:IntroductionSince adolescents with obesity are prone to bone fragility during weight loss, the aim was to compare the impact of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) versus moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) on bone density, geometry, and strength.MethodsSixty-one adolescents were randomly assigned to 2 cycling trainings (HIIT and MICT) and a control (CTR, without training) group. Anthropometry, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry with hip structural analysis and the trabecular bone score (TBS) were assessed before and after the 16-week intervention.ResultsBody mass index (BMI) and fat mass (FM) percentage decreased at T1 versus T0 in both training groups (p < 0.001 for HIIT, p = 0.01 for MICT), though to a larger extent in HIIT (p < 0.05). Total body bone mineral density (BMD) and bone mineral content (BMC) increased in both training groups (p < 0.001), but to a greater extent in HIIT for BMC (p < 0.05). Lumbar spine BMD and BMC increased in both training groups (p < 0.001 for HIIT, p < 0.01 for MICT), with a time × group interaction between HIIT and CTR (p < 0.05) only. TBS increased in both training groups (p < 0.01 for HIIT, p < 0.05 for MICT). Hip BMD and BMC increased in both HIIT (p < 0.001 and p < 0.01) and MICT (p < 0.01 and p < 0.05). At the narrow neck (NN), endocortical diameter, width (p < 0.01), cross-sectional moment of inertia, and section modulus (Z) (p < 0.05) increased only in the HIIT group, such as BMD and Z (p < 0.05) at the intertrochanteric region (IT) and average cortical thickness (p < 0.001) and width (p < 0.05) at the femoral shaft. At the NN and IT, the buckling ratio decreased only in the HIIT group (p < 0.05), predicting higher resistance to fracture.ConclusionsIn addition to inducing greater BMI and FM percentage decreases in comparison to MICT, HIIT improves multisite bone density, geometry, and strength, which heighten the justification for HIIT as part of weight loss interventions in adolescents with obesity.

Project description:Similar to muscles, the intestine is also insulin resistant in obese subjects and subjects with impaired glucose tolerance. Exercise training improves muscle insulin sensitivity, but its effects on intestinal metabolism are not known. We studied the effects of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) and moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) on intestinal glucose and free fatty acid uptake from circulation in humans. Twenty-eight healthy, middle-aged, sedentary men were randomized for 2 wk of HIIT or MICT. Intestinal insulin-stimulated glucose uptake and fasting free fatty acid uptake from circulation were measured using positron emission tomography and [18F]FDG and [18F]FTHA. In addition, effects of HIIT and MICT on intestinal GLUT2 and CD36 protein expression were studied in rats. Training improved aerobic capacity (P = 0.001) and whole body insulin sensitivity (P = 0.04), but not differently between HIIT and MICT. Insulin-stimulated glucose uptake increased only after the MICT in the colon (HIIT = 0%; MICT = 37%) (P = 0.02 for time × training) and tended to increase in the jejunum (HIIT = -4%; MICT = 13%) (P = 0.08 for time × training). Fasting free fatty acid uptake decreased in the duodenum in both groups (HIIT = -6%; MICT = -48%) (P = 0.001 time) and tended to decrease in the colon in the MICT group (HIIT = 0%; MICT = -38%) (P = 0.08 for time × training). In rats, both training groups had higher GLUT2 and CD36 expression compared with control animals. This study shows that already 2 wk of MICT enhances insulin-stimulated glucose uptake, while both training modes reduce fasting free fatty acid uptake in the intestine in healthy, middle-aged men, providing an additional mechanism by which exercise training can improve whole body metabolism.NEW & NOTEWORTHY This is the first study where the effects of exercise training on the intestinal substrate uptake have been investigated using the most advanced techniques available. We also show the importance of exercise intensity in inducing these changes.

Project description:Purpose: The main objective of this meta-analysis was to compare the effectiveness of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) and of moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) on cardiometabolic health in childhood obesity and determine whether HIIT is a superior form of training in managing obese children's metabolic health. Methods: Relevant studies published in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, the Cochrane Library, EBSCO, and CNKI were searched, restricted to those published from inception to 1 October 2019. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) depicting the effect of HIIT on childhood obesity were included. Results: Nine RCTs involving 309 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Among the 309 participants, 158 subjects were randomized for HIIT, while the others were randomized for MICT. Significant differences were observed in the body weight (mean difference [MD] = -5.45 kg, p = 0.001), body mass index (BMI; MD = -1.661 kg/m2, p = 0.0001), systolic blood pressure (SBP; MD = -3.994 mmHg, p = 0.003), and diastolic blood pressure (DBP; MD = -3.087 mmHg, p = 0.0001) in the HIIT group relative to the baseline values. Similar effects were found in the MICT group, as depicted by the significantly decreased values for body weight (MD = -4.604 kg, p = 0.0001), BMI (MD = -2.366 kg/m2, p = 0.0001), SBP (MD = -3.089 mmHg, p = 0.019), and DBP (MD = -3.087 mmHg, p = 0.0001). However, no significant differences were observed in the changes in body weight, BMI, SBP, or DBP between the HIIT and MICT groups. Furthermore, our studies showed that both HIIT and MICT could significantly improve VO2peak (HIIT, MD = 4.17 ml/kg/min, 95% CI: 3.191 to 5.163, p = 0.0001; MICT, MD = 1.704 ml/kg/min, 95% CI: 0.279 to 3.130, p = 0.019). HIIT also showed more positive effects on VO2peak (SMD = 0.468, 95% CI: 0.040 to 0.897, p = 0.006) than MICT. Conclusion: HIIT positively affects the cardiometabolic risk factors in childhood obesity. Similar positive effects on body composition and blood pressure were established. Moreover, HIIT can improve cardiorespiratory fitness more significantly than MICT. These findings indicate that HIIT may be an alternative and effective training method for managing childhood obesity. PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42018111308.

Project description:To date, there are several knowledge gaps on how to properly prescribe concurrent training to achieve the best dose-response, especially regarding the optimal intensity or volume of the aerobic component. Thus, the objective of this study is to analyze the effects of different aerobic exercise modes and intensities [i.e. aerobic high-intensity interval training (HIIT) versus moderate-intensity continuous aerobic training (MICT) combined with a resistance training (RT) program] on metabolic outcomes in participants with metabolic syndrome (MetS). Thirty-nine men and women (67.0 ± 6.7 years) volunteered to a 12-weeks exercise intervention (3 week-1, 50 min/session) and were randomly assigned to one of three groups: (a) RT plus MICT (RT+MICT) (2 males; 11 females); (b) RT plus HIIT (RT+HIIT) (4 males; 9 females); and (c) control group (CON) - without formal exercise (4 males; 9 females). Intensity was established between 60 and 70% of maximum heart rate (HRmax) in RT+MICT and ranged from 55-65% to 80-90% HRmax in the RT+HIIT group. Dependent outcomes included morphological, metabolic and hemodynamic variables. Both training groups improved waist circumference (RT+MICT: P = 0.019; RT+HIIT: P = 0.003), but not body weight, fat mass or fat-free mass (P ? 0.114). RT+HIIT group improved fasting glucose (P = 0.014), low density lipoprotein [LDL (P = 0.022)], insulin (P = 0.034) and homeostatic model assessment (P = 0.028). RT+MICT group reduced triglycerides (P = 0.053). Both exercise interventions did not change high sensitivity C-reactive protein, glycated hemoglobin, high density lipoprotein and total cholesterol, systolic, diastolic or mean arterial blood pressure (P ? 0.05). The CON group reduced the LDL (P = 0.031). This trial suggests that short-term exercise mode and intensity may differently impact the metabolic profile of individuals with MetS. Further, our data suggests that both concurrent trainings promote important cardiometabolic gains, particularly in the RT+HIIT. Nonetheless, due to the small-to-moderate effect size and the short-term intervention length, our data suggests that the intervention length also has an important modulating role in these benefits in older adults with MetS. Therefore, more research is needed to confirm our results using longer exercise interventions and larger groups.

Dataset Information

High-Intensity Interval Training Is Equivalent to Moderate-Intensity Continuous Training for Short- and Medium-Term Outcomes of Glucose Control, Cardiometabolic Risk, and Microvascular Complication Markers in Men With Type 2 Diabetes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets