BackgroundHeart rate recovery (HRR) is a noninvasive assessment of autonomic dysfunction and has been implicated with risk of cardiovascular events and all‐cause mortality. However, evidence has not been systematically assessed. We performed a meta‐analysis of prospective cohort studies to quantify these associations in the general population.Methods and ResultsA literature search using 3 databases up to August 2016 was conducted for studies that reported hazard ratios with 95% CIs for the association between baseline HRR and outcomes of interest. The overall hazard ratios were calculated using a random‐effects model. There were 9 eligible studies in total, with 5 for cardiovascular events enrolling 1061 cases from 34 267 participants, and 9 for all‐cause mortality enrolling 2082 cases from 41 600 participants. The pooled hazard ratios associated with attenuated HRR versus fast HRR that served as the referent were 1.69 (95% CI 1.05–2.71) for cardiovascular events and 1.68 (95% CI 1.51–1.88) for all‐cause mortality. For every 10 beats per minute decrements in HRR, the hazard ratios were 1.13 (95% CI 1.05–1.21) and 1.09 (95% CI 1.01–1.19), respectively. Further analyses suggested that the associations observed between attenuated HRR and risk of fatal cardiovascular events and all‐cause mortality were independent of traditional metabolic factors for cardiovascular disease (all P<0.05).ConclusionsAttenuated HRR is associated with increased risk of cardiovascular events and all‐cause mortality, which supports the recommendation of recording HRR for risk assessment in clinical practice as a routine.
BackgroundWhile step counter use has become popular among type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients, its effectiveness in increasing physical activity (PA) and improving glycemic control has been poorly defined. The aim of this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was to evaluate the association of step counter use with PA and glycemic control in T2D patients.MethodsArticles were identified by searches of PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane Library from January 1994 to June 2013. RCTs in the English language were included, if they had assessed the effectiveness of step counters as motivating and monitoring tools in T2D patients, with reported changes in steps per day (steps/d) or glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), or both. Data were independently collected by 2 authors and overall estimates were made by a random-effects model.ResultsOf the 551 articles retrieved, 11 RCTs were included. Step counter use significantly increased PA by 1,822 steps/d (7 studies, 861 participants; 95% confidence interval (CI): 751 to 2,894 steps/d) in patients with T2D. Step counter use with a PA goal showed a bigger increase in PA (weighted mean difference (WMD) 3,200 steps/d, 95% CI: 2,053 to 4,347 steps/d) than without (WMD 598 steps/d, 95% CI: −65 to 1,260 steps/d). Further subgroup analysis suggested step counter use with a self-set PA goal (WMD 2,816 steps/d, 95% CI: 1,288 to 4,344 steps/d) made no difference in increasing PA from a 10,000 steps/d goal (WMD 3,820 steps/d, 95% CI: 2,702 to 4,938 steps/d). However, no significant HbA1c change was observed by step counter use (10 studies, 1,423 participants; WMD 0.02%, 95% CI: −0.08% to 0.13%), either with (WMD 0.04%, 95% CI: −0.21% to 0.30%) or without a PA goal (WMD 0.01%, 95% CI: −0.10% to 0.13%).ConclusionsStep counter use is associated with a significant increase in PA in patients with T2D. However, evidence regarding its effect in improving glycemic control remains insufficient.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42013005236
Background and aimsExercise training is considered a cornerstone in the management of type 2 diabetes, which is associated with impaired endothelial function. However, the association of exercise training with endothelial function in type 2 diabetes patients has not been fully understood. This meta-analysis aimed to investigate their associations with focus on exercise types.MethodsDatabases were searched up to January 2018 for studies evaluating the influences of exercise training with durations ≥ 8 weeks on endothelial function assessed by flow-mediated dilation (FMD) among type 2 diabetes patients or between type 2 diabetics and non-diabetics. Data were pooled using random-effects models to obtain the weighted mean differences (WMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).ResultsSixteen databases were included. Exercise training resulted in an overall improvement in FMD by 1.77% (95% CI 0.94–2.59%) in type 2 diabetes patients. Specifically, both aerobic and combined aerobic and resistance exercise increased FMD by 1.21% (95% CI 0.23–2.19%) and 2.49% (95% CI 1.17–3.81%), respectively; but resistance exercise only showed a trend. High-intensity interval aerobic exercise did not significantly improve FMD over moderate-intensity continuous exercise. Notably, the improvement in FMD among type 2 diabetes patients was smaller compared with non-diabetics in response to exercise training (WMD − 0.72%, 95% CI − 1.36 to − 0.08%) or specifically to aerobic exercise (WMD − 0.65%, 95% CI − 1.31 to 0.01%).ConclusionsExercise training, in particular aerobic and combined exercise, improves endothelial function in type 2 diabetes patients, but such an improvement appears to be weakened compared with non-diabetics.Trial registration PROSPERO CRD42018087376Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12933-018-0711-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Although the regular consumption of resveratrol has been known to improve glucose homeostasis and reverse insulin resistance in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), the reported results are inconsistent. Thus, we aimed to assess the effects of resveratrol on glycemic control and insulin sensitivity among patients with T2DM. We searched for relevant articles published until June 2017 on PubMed-Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Randomized controlled trials in T2DM patients administered with resveratrol as intervention were included. After study selection, quality assessment and data extraction were performed independently by two authors, and STATA and RevMan software were used for statistical analysis. Nine randomized controlled trials involving 283 participants were included. Meta-analysis showed that resveratrol significantly improved the fasting plasma glucose ( −0.29 mmol/l, 95% CI: −0.51, −0.06, p < 0.01) and insulin levels (−0.64 U/mL, 95% CI: −0.95, −0.32, p < 0.0001). The drug also reduced homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) index, systolic blood pressure, and diastolic blood pressure among participants with T2DM. The changes in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol were negligible. Subgroup analysis comparing the resveratrol supplementation doses of < 100 mg/d versus ≥ 100 mg/d revealed a significant difference in fasting plasma glucose. In particular, the latter dose presented more favorable results. This meta-analysis provides evidence that supplementation of resveratrol may benefit management of T2DM.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12986-017-0217-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
BackgroundWalking is the most popular and most preferred exercise among type 2 diabetes patients, yet compelling evidence regarding its beneficial effects on cardiovascular risk factors is still lacking. The aim of this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was to evaluate the association between walking and glycemic control and other cardiovascular risk factors in type 2 diabetes patients.MethodsThree databases were searched up to August 2014. English-language RCTs were eligible for inclusion if they had assessed the walking effects (duration ≥8 weeks) on glycemic control or other cardiovascular risk factors among type 2 diabetes patients. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. Subgroup analyses based on supervision status and meta-regression analyses of variables regarding characteristics of participants and walking were performed to investigate their association with glycemic control.ResultsEighteen studies involving 20 RCTs (866 participants) were included. Walking significantly decreased glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) by 0.50% (95% confidence intervals [CI]: −0.78% to −0.21%). Supervised walking was associated with a pronounced decrease in HbA1c (WMD −0.58%, 95% CI: −0.93% to −0.23%), whereas non-supervised walking was not. Further subgroup analysis suggested non-supervised walking using motivational strategies is also effective in decreasing HbA1c (WMD −0.53%, 95% CI: −1.05% to −0.02%). Effects of covariates on HbA1c change were generally unclear. For other cardiovascular risk factors, walking significantly reduced body mass index (BMI) and lowered diastolic blood pressure (DBP), but non-significantly lowered systolic blood pressure (SBP), or changed high-density or low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels.ConclusionsThis meta-analysis supports that walking decreases HbA1c among type 2 diabetes patients. Supervision or the use of motivational strategies should be suggested when prescribed walking to ensure optimal glycemic control. Walking also reduces BMI and lowers DBP, however, it remains insufficient regarding the association of walking with lowered SBP or improved lipoprotein profiles.Trial RegistrationPROSPERO CRD42014009515
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.