Acute glycemic and pressure responses of continuous and interval aerobic exercise in patients with type 2 diabetes

Abstract

Both continuous and interval aerobic exercise, in a same intensity, are effective for glycemic and pressure acute reductions in individuals with type 2 diabetes. For patients with greater risk of hypertension, we believe that the interval method is safer.

Acute and chronic glycemic effects of aerobic training in patients with type 2 diabetes

“…After the exercise sessions, they found that the interval exercise had better glycemic control results when compared to the continuous exercise. Santiago et al 3 conducted a training protocol similar to the one used in the present study and they also obtained satisfactory results: Glycemic levels were reduced both in the group of continuous training (45 mg/dL) and in the group of interval training (49 mg/dL). However, in these studies, the glycemic response to the exercise was assessed within the same moment and/or training status, which makes it difficult to establish a discussion with the proposal of the present study, which focused on the comparison between the glycemic responses at the beginning and at the end of an intervention.…”

“…Other studies 3,6,8 that analyzed the acute effect of aerobic exercise on the blood glucose of patients with T2D have also found glycemic reductions. Figueira et al 6 found a glycemic decrease of 27 mg/dL immediately after a 40-minute session with intensity of 70% of peak heart rate.…”

“…Regarding the acute effect of exercise, studies with different aerobic training protocols have been showing glycemic reductions [3][4][5][6] . However, these studies usually analyze the response of different sessions in the same training status, without investigating the acute glycemic effects throughout the exercise programs.…”

Glycemic Threshold as an Alternative Method to Identify the Anaerobic Threshold in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes

“…In recent years, discussion about physical training and type 2 diabetes, especially about endurance (aerobic and/or anaerobic) training has been common, aside from the type or modality of training. Currently, studies evaluating endurance training in patients with type 2 diabetes not only compare their effects with resistance and combined training effects, but also perform many comparisons between the different ways/models of endurance training ( Delevatti et al, 2016a ; Asano et al, 2017 ; Pandey et al, 2017 ; Santiago et al, 2018 ). These studies have been evaluating acute ( Terada et al, 2013 ; Delevatti et al, 2016b ; Asano et al, 2017 ; Santiago et al, 2018 ) and chronic ( Li et al, 2012 ; Ruffino et al, 2017 ; Pandey et al, 2017 ) effects in varying outcomes, including blood glucose, blood pressure, insulin, bradykinin, HbA1c, insulin resistance, and lipid profile.…”

Efeitos do treinamento físico aeróbio contínuo e intermitente sobre parâmetros endócrino-metabólicos, composição corporal e comprimento do telômero em mulheres com síndrome dos ovários policísticos: ensaio clínico controlado

“…Essa superioridade do treinamento intermitente também foi demonstrada por outros autores, que verificaram uma menor deposição de gordura, maior eficiência no metabolismo de glicose e uma melhora mais acentuada da biogênese mitocondrial (YOSHIOKA et al, 2001;POPOV et al, 2014;CHAVANELLE et al, 2017). Por outro lado, Santiago et al (2018) encontraram que ambos modelos de treinamento foram efetivos na regulação da glicemia e da pressão arterial; Sjoros et al 2018, que os dois modelos melhoraram a absorção de glicose e Motiani et al (2017) que o treinamento físico aeróbio contínuo foi mais efetivo na captação de glicose estimulada por insulina. O fato do nosso grupo apresentar níveis de glicemia e insulina dentro de valores relativamente normais diante dos achados em diabéticos, possa ser uma justificativa para não alteração dos dados referentes a ambos.…”