Interrupting Sitting Time with Simple Resistance Activities Lowers Postprandial Insulinemia in Adults with Overweight or Obesity

Larsen, Robyn N.; Ali, Hamza; Dempsey, Paddy C.; Grace, Megan S.; Dillon, Francis; Kingwell, Bronwyn A.; Cohen, Neale; Owen, Neville; Green, Daniel; Dunstan, David W.

doi:10.1002/oby.22554

Cited by 12 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The results of the current study also add weight to a small but growing body of evidence, which indicates that interrupting sitting with short bouts of simple resistance exercise (11,(21)(22)(23) attenuates both postprandial glucose and insulin responses in a magnitude that is similar to the reductions seen with walking activity breaks (11,23). Two of these studies were performed in participants with type 2 diabetes (22,23).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 70%

Breaking Up Evening Sitting with Resistance Activity Improves Postprandial Glycemic Response: A Randomized Crossover Study

Gale

Wei

Haszard

et al. 2023

Medicine &Amp; Science in Sports &Amp; Exercise

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionInterrupting sedentary time during the day reduces postprandial glycemia (a risk factor for cardiometabolic disease). However, it is not known if benefits exist for postprandial glucose, insulin and triglyceride responses in the evening, and if these benefits differ by body mass index (BMI) category.MethodsIn a randomized crossover study, 30 participants (25.4 ± 5.4 yr old; BMI 18.5–24.9: n = 10, BMI 25–29.9: n = 10, BMI ≥30: n = 10) completed two intervention arms, beginning at ~1700 h: prolonged sitting for 4 h, and sitting with regular activity breaks of 3 min of resistance exercises every 30 min. Plasma glucose, insulin, and triglyceride concentrations were measured in response to two meals fed at baseline and 120 min. Four-hour incremental area under the curve was compared between interventions. Moderation by BMI status was explored.ResultsOverall, when compared with prolonged sitting, regular activity breaks lowered plasma glucose and insulin incremental area under the curve by 31.5% (95% confidence interval = −49.3% to −13.8%) and 26.6% (−39.6% to −9.9%), respectively. No significant differences were found for plasma triglyceride area under the curve. Interactions between BMI status and intervention was not statistically significant.ConclusionsInterventions that interrupt sedentary time in the evening may improve cardiometabolic health by some magnitude in all participants regardless of bodyweight.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 70%

Breaking Up Evening Sitting with Resistance Activity Improves Postprandial Glycemic Response: A Randomized Crossover Study

Gale

Wei

Haszard

et al. 2023

Medicine &Amp; Science in Sports &Amp; Exercise

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Observational studies have reported that in the general population, those who regularly interrupt their sitting time have more favorable cardiometabolic risk profiles (11)(12)(13)(14). In healthy adults and those at high risk of developing T2D, experimental evidence has shown beneficial impacts on postprandial cardiometabolic risk markers when prolonged sitting is interrupted with short, frequent activity bouts (15)(16)(17)(18)(19). These studies have used varying durations, frequencies, and modalities of interruptions, with differing findings.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Frequency of Interruptions to Sitting Time: Benefits for Postprandial Metabolism in Type 2 Diabetes

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVE To determine whether interrupting sitting with brief bouts of simple resistance activities (SRAs) at different frequencies improves postprandial glucose, insulin, and triglycerides in adults with medication-controlled type 2 diabetes (T2D). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Participants (n = 23, 10 of whom were female, with mean ± SD age 62 ± 8 years and BMI 32.7 ± 3.5 kg · m−2) completed a three-armed randomized crossover trial (6- to 14-day washout): sitting uninterrupted for 7 h (SIT), sitting with 3-min SRAs (half squats, calf raises, gluteal contractions, and knee raises) every 30 min (SRA3), and sitting with 6-min SRAs every 60 min (SRA6). Net incremental areas under the curve (iAUCnet) for glucose, insulin, and triglycerides were compared between conditions. RESULTS Glucose and insulin 7-h iAUCnet were attenuated significantly during SRA6 (glucose 17.0 mmol · h · L−1, 95% CI 12.5, 21.4; insulin 1,229 pmol · h · L−1, 95% CI 982, 1,538) in comparison with SIT (glucose 21.4 mmol · h · L−1, 95% CI 16.9, 25.8; insulin 1,411 pmol · h · L−1, 95% CI 1,128, 1,767; P < 0.05) and in comparison with SRA3 (for glucose only) (22.1 mmol · h · L−1, 95% CI 17.7, 26.6; P = 0.01) No significant differences in glucose or insulin iAUCnet were observed in comparison of SRA3 and SIT. There was no statistically significant effect of condition on triglyceride iAUCnet. CONCLUSIONS In adults with medication-controlled T2D, interrupting prolonged sitting with 6-min SRAs every 60 min reduced postprandial glucose and insulin responses. Other frequencies of interruptions and potential longer-term benefits require examination to clarify clinical relevance.

show abstract

“…Sedentary Behavior (SB) has become an emerging research field. A large number of studies associated sedentary time and more recently prolonged sedentary time (with a minimum bout duration) and the sedentary accumulation pattern with chronic lifestyle diseases and premature deaths [1][2][3][4][5][6]. To measure SB reliably and accurately, it is well established that sensor-based methods should be employed, and accelerometers are the method of choice [7,8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is Sitting Always Inactive and Standing Always Active? A Simultaneous Free-Living activPal and ActiGraph Analysis

Kuster

Grooten

Blom

et al. 2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sedentary Behavior (SB), defined as sitting with minimal physical activity, is an emergent public health topic. However, the measurement of SB considers either posture (e.g., activPal) or physical activity (e.g., ActiGraph), and thus neglects either active sitting or inactive standing. The aim of this study was to determine the true amount of active sitting and inactive standing in daily life, and to analyze by how much these behaviors falsify the single sensors’ sedentary estimates. Sedentary time of 100 office workers estimated with activPal and ActiGraph was therefore compared with Bland-Altman statistics to a combined sensor analysis, the posture and physical activity index (POPAI). POPAI classified each activPal sitting and standing event into inactive or active using the ActiGraph counts. Participants spent 45.0% [32.2%–59.1%] of the waking hours inactive sitting (equal to SB), 13.7% [7.8%–21.6%] active sitting, and 12.0% [5.7%–24.1%] inactive standing (mean [5th–95th percentile]). The activPal overestimated sedentary time by 30.3% [12.3%–48.4%] and the ActiGraph by 22.5% [3.2%–41.8%] (bias [95% limit-of-agreement]). The results showed that sitting is not always inactive, and standing is not always active. Caution should therefore be paid when interpreting the activPal (ignoring active sitting) and ActiGraph (ignoring inactive standing) measured time as SB.

show abstract

Interrupting Sitting Time with Simple Resistance Activities Lowers Postprandial Insulinemia in Adults with Overweight or Obesity

Cited by 12 publications

References 39 publications

Breaking Up Evening Sitting with Resistance Activity Improves Postprandial Glycemic Response: A Randomized Crossover Study

Breaking Up Evening Sitting with Resistance Activity Improves Postprandial Glycemic Response: A Randomized Crossover Study

Frequency of Interruptions to Sitting Time: Benefits for Postprandial Metabolism in Type 2 Diabetes

Is Sitting Always Inactive and Standing Always Active? A Simultaneous Free-Living activPal and ActiGraph Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About