Project description:This study aimed to investigate the effects of concurrent aerobic and strength training (CT) in patients with type 2 diabetes and determine the most effective dose of CT. From the inception of the databases to March 2024, we conducted a systematic search of four electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on CT intervention in patients with type 2 diabetes. Two independent authors assessed the risk of bias of the study using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tools. Results analyzed included glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting blood glucose (FBG), body mass index, body fat percentage, blood pressure, and VO2max. Pairwise and dose-response meta-analyses using Bayesian hierarchical random-effects modeling were performed to analyze the effects of CT in patients with type 2 diabetes. From the inception of the databases to March 2024, we conducted a systematic search of four electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on CT intervention in patients with type 2 diabetes. Two independent authors assessed the risk of bias of the study using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tools. Results analyzed included glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting blood glucose (FBG), body mass index, body fat percentage, blood pressure, and VO2max. Pairwise and dose-response meta-analyses using Bayesian hierarchical random-effects modeling were performed to analyze the effects of CT in patients with type 2 diabetes. A total of 1948 participants (935 males) were included in 23 RCTs. The male/female ratio of participants was 52/48; the mean age range was 50-65 years. The results show that CT significantly reduced HbA1c levels (MD=-0.48%, 95% CrI: -0.55 to -0.40), with some heterogeneity among different levels (SD=0.31, 95% CrI: 0.17 to 0.51), and the model converged well. Similarly, FBG levels were also significantly improved (MD=-0.48 mmol/L, 95% CrI: -0.55 to -0.40), with greater heterogeneity (SD=17.73, 95% CrI: 11.23 to 28.09). Additionally, we found a non-linear dose-response relationship between CT and HbA1c levels, with an optimal dose of 1030 METs-min/week (MD=-0.47%, 95% CrI: -0.68 to -0.26, SE=0.11). CT significantly improves several health indicators in patients with type 2 diabetes. A non-linear dose-response relationship was observed between the training dose of CT and HbA1c, and it is recommended that 270 min of moderate-intensity CT or 160 min of vigorous-intensity CT be performed weekly.PROSPERO registration number: CRD42024547119.Keywords: meta-analysis; concurrent aerobic and strength training.

Project description:Current recommendations for the prevention of type 2 diabetes advise modification of diet and exercise behaviors including both aerobic and resistance training. However, the efficacy of multi-component interventions involving a combination of these three components has not been established. The aims of this review were to systematically review and meta-analyze the evidence on multi-component (diet?+?aerobic exercise?+?resistance training) lifestyle interventions for type 2 diabetes prevention. Eight electronic databases (Medline, Embase, SportDiscus, Web of Science, CINAHL, Informit health collection, Cochrane library and Scopus) were searched up to June 2013. Eligible studies 1) recruited prediabetic adults or individuals at risk of type 2 diabetes; 2) conducted diet and exercise [including both physical activity/aerobic and resistance training] programs; and 3) reported weight and plasma glucose outcomes. In total, 23 articles from eight studies were eligible including five randomized controlled trials, one quasi-experimental, one two-group comparison and one single-group pre-post study. Four studies had a low risk of bias (score???6/10). Median intervention length was 12 months (range 4-48 months) with a follow-up of 18 months (range 6.5-48 months). The diet and exercise interventions varied slightly in terms of their specific prescriptions. Meta-analysis favored interventions over controls for weight loss (-3.79 kg [-6.13, -1.46; 95% CI], Z?=?3.19, P?=?0.001) and fasting plasma glucose (-0.13 mmol.L?¹ [-0.24, -0.02; 95% CI], Z?=?2.42, P?=?0.02). Diabetes incidence was only reported in two studies, with reductions of 58% and 56% versus control groups. In summary, multi-component lifestyle type 2 diabetes prevention interventions that include diet and both aerobic and resistance exercise training are modestly effective in inducing weight loss and improving impaired fasting glucose, glucose tolerance, dietary and exercise outcomes in at risk and prediabetic adult populations. These results support the current exercise guidelines for the inclusion of resistance training in type 2 diabetes prevention, however there remains a need for more rigorous studies, with long-term follow-up evaluating program efficacy, muscular fitness outcomes, diabetes incidence and risk reduction.

Project description:PurposeWe compared the effects of low-volume combined aerobic and resistance high-intensity interval training (C-HIIT), combined moderate-intensity continuous training (C-MICT) and waitlist control (CON) on vascular health after 8-weeks of supervised training, and an additional 10-months of self-directed training, in adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D).MethodsSixty-nine low active adults with T2D were randomised to 8-weeks of supervised C-HIIT (3 times/week, 78-min/week), C-MICT (current exercise guidelines, 4 times/week, 210-min/week) or CON. CON underwent usual care for 8-weeks before being re-randomised to C-HIIT or C-MICT. This was followed by 10-months of self-directed training for participants in C-HIIT and C-MICT. Vascular outcomes were evaluated at baseline, 8-weeks, and 12-months.ResultsAfter 8-weeks, supervised C-HIIT significantly improved relative flow-mediated dilation (FMD) compared with CON (mean difference [MD] 0.8% [0.1, 1.4], p = 0.025). Although not significantly different from CON, the magnitude of change in relative FMD following 8-weeks of supervised C-MICT was similar (MD 0.8% [-0.1, 1.7], p = 0.080). There were no differences in haemodynamic indices, carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV), or aortic reservoir pressure between groups at 8-weeks. After 12-months, there was a significant reduction in haemodynamic indices (time effect, p < 0.05) for both C-HIIT and C-MICT, with no between-group difference. The reduction in cfPWV over 12-months was significantly greater in C-MICT than C-HIIT (group × time effect, p = 0.018). There was no difference in FMD over time or between groups at 12-months.ConclusionsShort-term supervised C-HIIT and C-MICT both increased brachial artery FMD compared with CON. Long-term C-HIIT and C-MICT were beneficial for improving haemodynamic indices, but not brachial artery FMD. C-MICT was superior to C-HIIT for improving cfPWV at 12-months.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry Identifier ACTRN12615000475549.

Project description:BackgroundExercise training is a major factor in controlling type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) in children. The present study aimed to assess the effect of concurrent resistance-aerobic training on selected inflammatory factors and hormones related to blood glucose homeostasis in children with T1DM.MethodsIn this randomized controlled clinical trial, 40 children (with the mean age of 11.11 ± 2.29 years) were randomly assigned to an experimental (N = 20) or control group (N = 20). They underwent a 16-week training program, composed of concurrent resistance-aerobic training performed intermittently for 60 min three times a week. Before and after training, blood samples were analyzed for glucose homeostasis, selected inflammatory factors, and growth factors. Data were analyzed by paired t-test and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) in IBM SPSS version 22.ResultsThe exercise training intervention reduced fasting blood sugar index (P = 0.002) and glycosylated hemoglobin significantly (P = 0.003). The growth hormone levels were increased significantly only in the experimental group (P = 0.037), whereas no significant difference was noted in the insulin-like growth factor-1 (P = 0.712). It was also found that interleukin-1β and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein did not change in the experimental or control group as compared to the pretest (P > 0.05).ConclusionAs it was shown, it seems that concurrent resistance-aerobic training may improve blood glucose homeostasis and growth hormone. Therefore, these findings may suggest the benefit from exercise training of moderate intensity in children with T1DM. Besides, we recommend undertaking further clinical trials to determine if the exercise training was effective.Trial registrationThis study was registered in the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials under the code IRCT20150531022498N30: https://en.irct.ir/trial/41031 . Registered on July 26, 2019. All experiments on the participants were following the Declaration of Helsinki.

Project description:BackgroundWhole muscle hypertrophy does not appear to be negatively affected by concurrent aerobic and strength training compared to strength training alone. However, there are contradictions in the literature regarding the effects of concurrent training on hypertrophy at the myofiber level.ObjectiveThe current study aimed to systematically examine the extent to which concurrent aerobic and strength training, compared with strength training alone, influences type I and type II muscle fiber size adaptations. We also conducted subgroup analyses to examine the effects of the type of aerobic training, training modality, exercise order, training frequency, age, and training status.DesignA systematic literature search was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) [PROSPERO: CRD42020203777]. The registered protocol was modified to include only muscle fiber hypertrophy as an outcome.Data sourcesPubMed/MEDLINE, ISI Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and Scopus were systematically searched on 12 August, 2020, and updated on 15 March, 2021.Eligibility criteriaPopulation: healthy adults of any sex and age; intervention: supervised, concurrent aerobic and strength training of at least 4 weeks; comparison: identical strength training prescription, with no aerobic training; and outcome: muscle fiber hypertrophy.ResultsA total of 15 studies were included. The estimated standardized mean difference based on the random-effects model was - 0.23 (95% confidence interval [CI] - 0.46 to - 0.00, p = 0.050) for overall muscle fiber hypertrophy. The standardized mean differences were - 0.34 (95% CI - 0.72 to 0.04, p = 0.078) and - 0.13 (95% CI - 0.39 to 0.12, p = 0.315) for type I and type II fiber hypertrophy, respectively. A negative effect of concurrent training was observed for type I fibers when aerobic training was performed by running but not cycling (standardized mean difference - 0.81, 95% CI - 1.26 to - 0.36). None of the other subgroup analyses (i.e., based on concurrent training frequency, training status, training modality, and training order of same-session training) revealed any differences between groups.ConclusionsIn contrast to previous findings on whole muscle hypertrophy, the present results suggest that concurrent aerobic and strength training may have a small negative effect on fiber hypertrophy compared with strength training alone. Preliminary evidence suggests that this interference effect may be more pronounced when aerobic training is performed by running compared with cycling, at least for type I fibers.

Project description:BackgroundAerobic training (AT) improves glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes. However, the role of the progression of training variables remains unclear. The objective of this review was to analyze the effects of progressive AT (PAT) and non-progressive AT (NPAT) on glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) in patients with type 2 diabetes.MethodsData sources used were PubMed, Cochrane Central, Embase, SPORTDiscus, and LILACS. Studies that evaluated the effect of at least 12 weeks of PAT and NPAT compared to a control condition on HbA1c levels in type 2 diabetes patients were eligible for analysis. Two independent reviewers screened the search results, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias. Effect sizes (ESs) were calculated using the standardized mean difference in HbA1c levels between the intervention and control groups using a random-effect model.ResultsOf 5848 articles retrieved, 24 randomized clinical trials (825 participants) were included. Among the included studies, 92% reported to have performed a randomization process, 8% presented allocation concealment, 21% reported blinding of outcome assessment, and 38% reported complete outcome data. AT reduced HbA1c levels by 0.65% (ES: - 1.037; 95% confidence interval [CI]: - 1.386, - 0.688; p < 0.001). The reduction in HbA1c induced by PAT was 0.84% (ES: - 1.478; 95% CI - 2.197, - 0.759; p < 0.001), and NPAT was 0.45% (ES: - 0.920; 95% CI - 1.329, - 0.512; p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis of the different forms of progression showed a reduction in HbA1c levels of 0.94% (ES: - 1.967; 95% CI - 3.783, - 0.151; p = 0.034) with progression in volume, 0.41% (ES: - 1.277; 95% CI - 2.499, - 0.056; p = 0.040) with progression in intensity, and 1.27% (ES: - 1.422; 95% CI - 2.544, - 0.300; p = 0.013) with progression in both volume and intensity. Subgroup analysis of the different modalities of AT showed a reduction of 0.69% (ES: - 1.078; 95% CI - 1.817, - 0.340; p = 0.004) with walking and/or running and of 1.12% (ES: - 2.614; 95% CI - 4.206, - 1.022; p = 0.001) with mixed protocols while progressive training was adopted. In non-progressive protocols, a significant HbA1c reduction was only found with walking and/or running (- 0.43%; ES: - 1.292; 95% CI - 1.856, - 0.72; p < 0.001).ConclusionThe effect of PAT on glycemic control was greater than that of NPAT, especially when volume and intensity were progressively incremented throughout the interventions.

Project description:BackgroundBoth athletes and recreational exercisers often perform relatively high volumes of aerobic and strength training simultaneously. However, the compatibility of these two distinct training modes remains unclear.ObjectiveThis systematic review assessed the compatibility of concurrent aerobic and strength training compared with strength training alone, in terms of adaptations in muscle function (maximal and explosive strength) and muscle mass. Subgroup analyses were conducted to examine the influence of training modality, training type, exercise order, training frequency, age, and training status.MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. PubMed/MEDLINE, ISI Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and Scopus were systematically searched (12 August 2020, updated on 15 March 2021). Eligibility criteria were as follows.Populationhealthy adults of any sex and age; Intervention: supervised concurrent aerobic and strength training for at least 4 weeks; Comparison: identical strength training prescription, with no aerobic training; Outcome: maximal strength, explosive strength, and muscle hypertrophy.ResultsA total of 43 studies were included. The estimated standardised mean differences (SMD) based on the random-effects model were - 0.06 (95% confidence interval [CI] - 0.20 to 0.09; p = 0.446), - 0.28 (95% CI - 0.48 to - 0.08; p = 0.007), and - 0.01 (95% CI - 0.16 to 0.18; p = 0.919) for maximal strength, explosive strength, and muscle hypertrophy, respectively. Attenuation of explosive strength was more pronounced when concurrent training was performed within the same session (p = 0.043) than when sessions were separated by at least 3 h (p > 0.05). No significant effects were found for the other moderators, i.e. type of aerobic training (cycling vs. running), frequency of concurrent training (> 5 vs. < 5 weekly sessions), training status (untrained vs. active), and mean age (< 40 vs. > 40 years).ConclusionConcurrent aerobic and strength training does not compromise muscle hypertrophy and maximal strength development. However, explosive strength gains may be attenuated, especially when aerobic and strength training are performed in the same session. These results appeared to be independent of the type of aerobic training, frequency of concurrent training, training status, and age.ProsperoCRD42020203777.

Dataset Information

Effects of concurrent aerobic and resistance training on vascular health in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets