Breaking sitting with light activities vs structured exercise: a randomised crossover study demonstrating benefits for glycaemic control and insulin sensitivity in type 2 diabetes

Bernard M F M Duvivier, Nicolaas C Schaper, Matthijs K C Hesselink, Linh van Kan, Nathalie Stienen, Bjorn Winkens, Annemarie Koster, Hans H C M Savelberg, Bernard M F M Duvivier, Nicolaas C Schaper, Matthijs K C Hesselink, Linh van Kan, Nathalie Stienen, Bjorn Winkens, Annemarie Koster, Hans H C M Savelberg

Abstract

Aims/hypothesis: We aimed to examine the effects of breaking sitting with standing and light-intensity walking vs an energy-matched bout of structured exercise on 24 h glucose levels and insulin resistance in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Methods: In a randomised crossover study, 19 patients with type 2 diabetes (13 men/6 women, 63 ± 9 years old) who were not using insulin each followed three regimens under free-living conditions, each lasting 4 days: (1) Sitting: 4415 steps/day with 14 h sitting/day; (2) Exercise: 4823 steps/day with 1.1 h/day of sitting replaced by moderate- to vigorous-intensity cycling (at an intensity of 5.9 metabolic equivalents [METs]); and (3) Sit Less: 17,502 steps/day with 4.7 h/day of sitting replaced by standing and light-intensity walking (an additional 2.5 h and 2.2 h, respectively, compared with the hours spent doing these activities in the Sitting regimen). Blocked randomisation was performed using a block size of six regimen orders using sealed, non-translucent envelopes. Individuals who assessed the outcomes were blinded to group assignment. Meals were standardised during each intervention. Physical activity and glucose levels were assessed for 24 h/day by accelerometry (activPAL) and a glucose monitor (iPro2), respectively. The incremental AUC (iAUC) for 24 h glucose (primary outcome) and insulin resistance (HOMA2-IR) were assessed on days 4 and 5, respectively.

Results: The iAUC for 24 h glucose (mean ± SEM) was significantly lower during the Sit Less intervention than in Sitting (1263 ± 189 min × mmol/l vs 1974 ± 324 min × mmol/l; p = 0.002), and was similar between Sit Less and Exercise (Exercise: 1383 ± 194 min × mmol/l; p = 0.499). Exercise failed to improve HOMA2-IR compared with Sitting (2.06 ± 0.28 vs 2.16 ± 0.26; p = 0.177). In contrast, Sit Less (1.89 ± 0.26) significantly reduced HOMA2-IR compared with Exercise (p = 0.015) as well as Sitting (p = 0.001).

Conclusions/interpretation: Breaking sitting with standing and light-intensity walking effectively improved 24 h glucose levels and improved insulin sensitivity in individuals with type 2 diabetes to a greater extent than structured exercise. Thus, our results suggest that breaking sitting with standing and light-intensity walking may be an alternative to structured exercise to promote glycaemic control in patients type 2 diabetes.

Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02371239 FUNDING: : The study was supported by a Kootstra grant from Maastricht University Medical Centre+, and the Dutch Heart Foundation. Financial support was also provided by Novo Nordisk BV, and Medtronic and Roche made the equipment available for continuous glucose monitoring.

Keywords: Glycaemic control; Insulin sensitivity; Light-intensity physical activity; Lipid metabolism; Sedentary behaviour; Sedentary breaks; Standing; Type 2 diabetes; Walking.

Conflict of interest statement

Data availability statement

The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Duality of interest

The authors declare that there is no duality of interest associated with this manuscript.

Contribution statement

BMFMD, HHCMS, NCS, AK, and MKCH conceived and designed the experiments. BMFMD, LvK and NS performed the experiments and enrolled patients. BMFMD and BW analysed the data. BMFMD wrote the first draft of the manuscript. BMFMD, HHCMS, NCS, AK, MKCH, LvK, NS and BW contributed to the writing of the manuscript. BMFMD, LvK and NS undertook data collection. All authors approved the final version of the manuscript. BMFMD and HCCMS are the guarantors of this work and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the analysis.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Study design. Each participant followed three activity regimens under free-living conditions, each lasting 4 days: (1) Sitting: 14 h sitting/day; (2) Exercise: 1.1 h/day of sitting replaced by moderate- to vigorous-intensity cycling; and (3) Sit Less: 4.7 h/day of sitting replaced by standing (2.5 h) and light-intensity walking (2.2 h), relative to time spent doing these activities in the Sitting regimen
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Mean 24 h glucose profiles during the last day of each activity regimen (n = 19 individuals). Solid line, Sitting regimen; dashed line, Sit Less regimen; dotted line, Exercise regimen
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
(a) Twenty-four hour glucose iAUC during the last day of each activity regimen, (b) insulin resistance expressed as HOMA2-IR on the morning after each activity regimen, (c) duration of hyperglycaemia, and (d) maximal reduction in glucose level at 30 min during the last day of each activity regimen. Data are estimated means ± SEM (n = 19 individuals). *p ≤ 0.05, **p < 0.01 vs Sitting regimen; †, p ≤ 0.05 vs Exercise regimen

References

    1. Hordern MD, Dunstan DW, Prins JB, Baker MK, Singh MA, Coombes JS. Exercise prescription for patients with type 2 diabetes and pre-diabetes: a position statement from exercise and sport science Australia. J Sports Sci Med. 2012;15:25–31. doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2011.04.005.
    1. Church T. Exercise in obesity, metabolic syndrome, and diabetes. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2011;53:412–418. doi: 10.1016/j.pcad.2011.03.013.
    1. World Health Organization . Global recommendations on physical activity for health. Geneva: WHO Press; 2010.
    1. Gill JM, Cooper AR. Physical activity and prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Sports Med. 2008;38:807–824. doi: 10.2165/00007256-200838100-00002.
    1. Pai LW, Li TC, Hwu YJ, Chang SC, Chen LL, Chang PY. The effectiveness of regular leisure-time physical activities on long-term glycemic control in people with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2016;113:77–85. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2016.01.011.
    1. Tucker JM, Welk GJ, Beyler NK. Physical activity in U.S.: adults compliance with the physical activity guidelines for Americans. Am J Prev Med. 2011;40:454–461. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2010.12.016.
    1. van Sloten TT, Savelberg HH, Duimel-Peeters IG, et al. Peripheral neuropathy, decreased muscle strength and obesity are strongly associated with walking in persons with type 2 diabetes without manifest mobility limitations. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2011;91:32–39. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2010.09.030.
    1. Biswas A, Oh PI, Faulkner GE, et al. Sedentary time and its association with risk for disease incidence, mortality, and hospitalization in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162:123–132. doi: 10.7326/M14-1651.
    1. Matthews CE, Chen KY, Freedson PS, et al. Amount of time spent in sedentary behaviors in the United States, 2003-2004. Am J Epidemiol. 2008;167:875–881. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwm390.
    1. van der Berg JD, Stehouwer CD, Bosma H, et al. Associations of total amount and patterns of sedentary behaviour with type 2 diabetes and the metabolic syndrome: the Maastricht Study. Diabetologia. 2016;59:709–718. doi: 10.1007/s00125-015-3861-8.
    1. Blankenship JM, Granados K, Braun B. Effects of subtracting sitting versus adding exercise on glycemic control and variability in sedentary office workers. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2014;39:1286–1293. doi: 10.1139/apnm-2014-0157.
    1. Dempsey PC, Larsen RN, Sethi P, et al. Benefits for type 2 diabetes of interrupting prolonged sitting with brief bouts of light walking or simple resistance activities. Diabetes Care. 2016;39:964–972. doi: 10.2337/dc15-2336.
    1. Dunstan DW, Kingwell BA, Larsen R, et al. Breaking up prolonged sitting reduces postprandial glucose and insulin responses. Diabetes Care. 2012;35:976–983. doi: 10.2337/dc11-1931.
    1. Henson J, Davies MJ, Bodicoat DH, et al. Breaking up prolonged sitting with standing or walking attenuates the postprandial metabolic response in postmenopausal women: a randomized acute study. Diabetes Care. 2016;39:130–138. doi: 10.2337/dc15-1240.
    1. Peddie MC, Bone JL, Rehrer NJ, Skeaff CM, Gray AR, Perry TL. Breaking prolonged sitting reduces postprandial glycemia in healthy, normal-weight adults: a randomized crossover trial. Am J Clin Nutr. 2013;98:358–366. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.112.051763.
    1. Duvivier BM, Schaper NC, Bremers MA, et al. Minimal intensity physical activity (standing and walking) of longer duration improves insulin action and plasma lipids more than shorter periods of moderate to vigorous exercise (cycling) in sedentary subjects when energy expenditure is comparable. PLoS ONE. 2013;8:e55542. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0055542.
    1. Manders RJ, Van Dijk JW, van Loon LJ. Low-intensity exercise reduces the prevalence of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2010;42:219–225. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181b3b16d.
    1. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2004) Human energy requirements. Report of a Joint FAO/WHO/UNU Expert Consultation. FAO, Rome, Italy
    1. Berendsen BA, Hendriks MR, Meijer K, Plasqui G, Schaper NC, Savelberg HH. Which activity monitor to use? Validity, reproducibility and user friendliness of three activity monitors. BMC Public Health. 2014;14:749. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-14-749.
    1. Ryan CG, Grant PM, Tigbe WW, Granat MH. The validity and reliability of a novel activity monitor as a measure of walking. Br J Sports Med. 2006;40:779–784. doi: 10.1136/bjsm.2006.027276.
    1. Kim Y, Welk GJ. Criterion validity of competing accelerometry-based activity monitoring devices. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2015;47:2456–2463. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000000691.
    1. Ainsworth BE, Haskell WL, Herrmann SD, et al. 2011 compendium of physical activities: a second update of codes and MET values. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011;43:1575–1581. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e31821ece12.
    1. Brouns F, Bjorck I, Frayn KN, et al. Glycaemic index methodology. Nutr Res Rev. 2005;18:145–171. doi: 10.1079/NRR2005100.
    1. Levy JC, Matthews DR, Hermans MP. Correct homeostasis model assessment (HOMA) evaluation uses the computer program. Diabetes Care. 1998;21:2191–2192. doi: 10.2337/diacare.21.12.2191.
    1. Temelkova-Kurktschiev TS, Koehler C, Henkel E, Leonhardt W, Fuecker K, Hanefeld M. Postchallenge plasma glucose and glycemic spikes are more strongly associated with atherosclerosis than fasting glucose or HbA1c level. Diabetes Care. 2000;23:1830–1834. doi: 10.2337/diacare.23.12.1830.
    1. Morrato EH, Hill JO, Wyatt HR, Ghushchyan V, Sullivan PW. Physical activity in U.S. adults with diabetes and at risk for developing diabetes, 2003. Diabetes Care. 2007;30:203–209. doi: 10.2337/dc06-1128.
    1. Nelson KM, Reiber G, Boyko EJ. Diet and exercise among adults with type 2 diabetes: findings from the third national health and nutrition examination survey (NHANES III) Diabetes Care. 2002;25:1722–1728. doi: 10.2337/diacare.25.10.1722.
    1. Martin A, Fitzsimons C, Jepson R, et al. Interventions with potential to reduce sedentary time in adults: systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2015;49:1056–1063. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2014-094524.
    1. Jennersjo P, Ludvigsson J, Lanne T, Nystrom FH, Ostgren CJ. Pedometer-determined physical activity level and change in arterial stiffness in type 2 diabetes over 4 years. Diabet Med. 2016;33:992–997. doi: 10.1111/dme.12873.
    1. Jocken JW, Blaak EE. Catecholamine-induced lipolysis in adipose tissue and skeletal muscle in obesity. Physiol Behav. 2008;94:219–230. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2008.01.002.
    1. Gill JM, Herd SL, Vora V, Hardman AE. Effects of a brisk walk on lipoprotein lipase activity and plasma triglyceride concentrations in the fasted and postprandial states. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2003;89:184–190. doi: 10.1007/s00421-002-0788-9.
    1. Cryer PE, Davis SN, Shamoon H. Hypoglycemia in diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2003;26:1902–1912. doi: 10.2337/diacare.26.6.1902.

Source: PubMed

3
Abonneren