Cargando…

Moderate-intensity continuous training: is it as good as high-intensity interval training for glycemic control in type 2 diabetes?

In Egypt, type 2 diabetes is higher in females than in males. Moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) has been the most widely used exercise form in type 2 diabetes. This study aims to compare the classical MICT to the newly popular high intensity interval training (HIIT) with regard to change...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Ahmad, Ahmad Mahdi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Korean Society of Exercise Rehabilitation 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6509469/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31111021
http://dx.doi.org/10.12965/jer.1836648.324
_version_ 1783417254340198400
author Ahmad, Ahmad Mahdi
author_facet Ahmad, Ahmad Mahdi
author_sort Ahmad, Ahmad Mahdi
collection PubMed
description In Egypt, type 2 diabetes is higher in females than in males. Moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) has been the most widely used exercise form in type 2 diabetes. This study aims to compare the classical MICT to the newly popular high intensity interval training (HIIT) with regard to changes in glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and estimated average glucose (eAG) in female type 2 diabetics. Twenty-six female patients with type 2 diabetes were assigned into three groups: a control group (n=9), a MICT group (n=9), and a HIIT group (n=8). Patients in both groups exercised on treadmill three days/week for 8 weeks. Patients in MICT exercised continuously for about 40 min at 65%–75% of peak heart rate (HRpeak). Patients in HIIT exercised for 4×4 min at 85%–90% of HRpeak with 3-min recovery in between at 65%–75% of HRpeak. Results showed that HbA1c was reduced significantly from 8.2% (7.45%–8.65%) to 6.9% (6.6%–7.15%) in MICT and from 8.23% (7.94%–8.85%) to 6.25% (6.1%–6.89%) in HIIT after interventions. Likewise, eAG was significantly reduced from 188.64 mg/dL (167.11–201.55 mg/dL) to 151.33 mg/dL (142.72–158.50 mg/dL) in MICT and from 189.64 mg/dL (181.18–207.29 mg/dL) to 136.69 mg/dL (128.37–151.04 mg/dL) in HIIT. No significant difference was found between HIIT and MICT in the measured variables. It is concluded that the less physically demanding MICT is as good as HIIT for normalizing hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetic females. Therefore, recent interests surrounding HIIT should not overemphasize it compared to the traditional MICT for improving glycemic outcomes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6509469
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Korean Society of Exercise Rehabilitation
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65094692019-05-20 Moderate-intensity continuous training: is it as good as high-intensity interval training for glycemic control in type 2 diabetes? Ahmad, Ahmad Mahdi J Exerc Rehabil Original Article In Egypt, type 2 diabetes is higher in females than in males. Moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) has been the most widely used exercise form in type 2 diabetes. This study aims to compare the classical MICT to the newly popular high intensity interval training (HIIT) with regard to changes in glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and estimated average glucose (eAG) in female type 2 diabetics. Twenty-six female patients with type 2 diabetes were assigned into three groups: a control group (n=9), a MICT group (n=9), and a HIIT group (n=8). Patients in both groups exercised on treadmill three days/week for 8 weeks. Patients in MICT exercised continuously for about 40 min at 65%–75% of peak heart rate (HRpeak). Patients in HIIT exercised for 4×4 min at 85%–90% of HRpeak with 3-min recovery in between at 65%–75% of HRpeak. Results showed that HbA1c was reduced significantly from 8.2% (7.45%–8.65%) to 6.9% (6.6%–7.15%) in MICT and from 8.23% (7.94%–8.85%) to 6.25% (6.1%–6.89%) in HIIT after interventions. Likewise, eAG was significantly reduced from 188.64 mg/dL (167.11–201.55 mg/dL) to 151.33 mg/dL (142.72–158.50 mg/dL) in MICT and from 189.64 mg/dL (181.18–207.29 mg/dL) to 136.69 mg/dL (128.37–151.04 mg/dL) in HIIT. No significant difference was found between HIIT and MICT in the measured variables. It is concluded that the less physically demanding MICT is as good as HIIT for normalizing hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetic females. Therefore, recent interests surrounding HIIT should not overemphasize it compared to the traditional MICT for improving glycemic outcomes. Korean Society of Exercise Rehabilitation 2019-04-26 /pmc/articles/PMC6509469/ /pubmed/31111021 http://dx.doi.org/10.12965/jer.1836648.324 Text en Copyright © 2019 Korean Society of Exercise Rehabilitation This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Ahmad, Ahmad Mahdi
Moderate-intensity continuous training: is it as good as high-intensity interval training for glycemic control in type 2 diabetes?
title Moderate-intensity continuous training: is it as good as high-intensity interval training for glycemic control in type 2 diabetes?
title_full Moderate-intensity continuous training: is it as good as high-intensity interval training for glycemic control in type 2 diabetes?
title_fullStr Moderate-intensity continuous training: is it as good as high-intensity interval training for glycemic control in type 2 diabetes?
title_full_unstemmed Moderate-intensity continuous training: is it as good as high-intensity interval training for glycemic control in type 2 diabetes?
title_short Moderate-intensity continuous training: is it as good as high-intensity interval training for glycemic control in type 2 diabetes?
title_sort moderate-intensity continuous training: is it as good as high-intensity interval training for glycemic control in type 2 diabetes?
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6509469/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31111021
http://dx.doi.org/10.12965/jer.1836648.324
work_keys_str_mv AT ahmadahmadmahdi moderateintensitycontinuoustrainingisitasgoodashighintensityintervaltrainingforglycemiccontrolintype2diabetes