<bold>Effect of three types of training on biochemical and anthropometric parameters in prediabetes: a systematic review </bold>

None

doi:10.15517/pensarmov.v18i2.40752

home Sumário navigate_before Anterior Atual Seguinte navigate_next

home Sumário

Revisión sistemática • Pensar en Movimiento 18 (2) • Jul-Dec 2020 • https://doi.org/10.15517/pensarmov.v18i2.40752 linkcopy

Effect of three types of training on biochemical and anthropometric parameters in prediabetes: a systematic review

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Abstract

Prediabetes is a metabolic condition that, if untreated, can progressively develop into type 2 diabetes. To reverse the process, a multidisciplinary treatment is required including lifestyle improvement, a healthy diet and exercise. The aim of this systematic review was to study the best exercise alternatives for prediabetes remission. Continuous Aerobic Training (CAT), Resistance Training (RT), and High Intensity Interval Training (HIIT) were compared. The search was conducted in Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, and SportDiscus in May 2019 and included experimental and pre-experimental studies with prediabetic participants having any of the aforementioned types of training and using anthropometric and/or biochemical outcomes. A total of 231 records were obtained, from which 11 met the inclusion criteria. Results showed that CAT, RT, and HIIT improved in metabolic and anthropometric prediabetic indicators in trials from 13 days to 16 weeks with a frequency of 2 to 5 times/week. Some of the studies did not find any significant differences. In addition, the vast diversity of methodologies implemented could have caused bias. Glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) is recommended for future trials with a minimum of a 12-week intervention to reduce the risk of bias.

Keywords prediabetes; aerobic training; resistance training; high intensity interval training

vertical_align_top file_download show_chart

more_horizclose
- image
- translate
- link
- article
- vertical_align_top
- file_download
- show_chart
- image
- translate
- link
- article

location_on

None Escuela de Educación Física, San José, San José, CR, 11501-2060, 2511-2930, 2511- 2753 - E-mail: fabiola.quirossegura@ucr.ac.cr

rss_feed Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

[TFN1] Nota. C: control, C1:control muestra de participantes sanos, cond: grupo que presenta la condición de prediabetes, ER: entrenamiento contra resistencia, A: entrenamiento aeróbico continuo, cal: calentamiento, enf: enfriamiento, est: estiramiento, v: veces, sem: semana(s), FCmáx: frecuencia cardiaca máxima, C/C: relación cintura/cadera, CC: circunferencia de cintura, MC: masa corporal, MG: masa grasa, MLG: masa libre de grasa, AM: área muscular, % grasa: porcentaje de grasa. Glu: glucosa en ayunas, Ins: insulinemia en ayunas. I HOMA: índice de HOMA.

[TFN2] Fuente: elaboración propia.

Autores	Año	Revista	País	n	Intervención	Tratamiento	Resultados
Gidlund et al.	2016	Physiological Reports	Finlandia	n = 17 C n = 20 ER n = 18 A	3 v/sem x 12 sem. Ajuste carga c/4sem	ER: 5 min cal+ est + 13 ejercicios + 5 min enf + est A: 5 min cal+ est + caminata del 55% al 75% de FC_reserva.+ 5 min enf + est	↓ I HOMA y Ins en A
Langleite et al.	2016	Archives of Physiology and Biochemistry	Noruega	n = 11 C₁ n = 11 cond	4 v/sem x 12 sem	HIIT: bicicleta estacionaria 2v/sem, 7min x 85% FC_máxx 3-5 intervalos y 2min x >90% FC_máxx 6-10 intervalos. ER: 2 v/sem, 10min cal + 8 ejercicios x 3-4 sets,	En cond: ↓ % grasa, CC ↑ AMmuslo
Lee et al.	2018	Nutrients	Noruega	n = 13 C₁ n = 13 cond	4 v/sem x 12 sem	HIIT: Bicicleta estacionaria 2v/sem x 60min/S ER: entrenamiento fuerza cuerpo entero 2 v/sem x 60min/sesión	En cond: ↓ MC, MG ↑ MLG, AMmuslo, sensibilidad de insulina.
Safarimosavi et al.	2018	Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.	Irán	n = 8 C n = 8 HIIT n = 8 CETAT n = 8 CETFAT	12 sem	HIIT: bicicleta, 10 intervalos x 60s al 90% VO_2max + 60s descanso a 50W. CETAT: bicicleta a oxidación_máx de grasa hasta gasto del HIIT. CETFAT: bicicleta al umbral anaeróbico hasta gasto del HIIT.	↓ Glu, Ins, I HOMA, PTOG ^(*) ↓ Glu: HIIT > CETAT ↓ Ins: CETFAT, HIIT > CETAT ↓ I HOMA: HIIT > CETAT ↓ HbA1c en HIIT en post test

Autores	Año	Revista	País	n	Intervención	Tratamiento	Resultados
Eichner et al.	2019	Experimental Physiology	USA	n = 17 A n = 14 HIIT	13 días, descanso en día 8	A: 12S x 70% de FC_máxx60minen cicloergómetro. HIIT: 10 intervalos x 3min al 90% FC_máx,3min al 50% FC_máx en cicloergómetro.	↓ CC, Glu_post, Ins_post, PTOG ^(**)
Eikenberg et al.	2016	PLoS ONE	USA	n = 73 IFG n = 21 IGT n = 65 IFG/IGT	12 sem, 2 v/sem	ER: 12 ejercicios, 1 x 6-12 reps con intensidad "duro" en EEP (3s concéntrico x 3s excéntrico).	↓ CC, % grasa, Glu_post, PTOG ^() ↑ MLG ^() ↓ PTOG: IGT, IFG/IGT > IGF
Gilbertson et al.	2018	Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise	USA	n = 17 A n = 14 HIIT	13 días	A: cicloergómetro, 12S x 60 min/S al 70% FC_máx. HIIT: cicloergómetro, 10 intervalos x 3min al 90% FC_máx, 3min al 50% FC_máx.	↓ IMC, MLG, Glu_post, Ins_post, PTOG ^(**)
Jung et al.	2015	Journal of Diabetes Research	Canadá	n = 13 A n = 10 HIIT	6 sem: 12 días presenciales + 4 sem de forma independiente (3 veces/sem)	A: 3 min cal + 20-50 min al 65% de la FC_máx+ 2 min enf. HIIT: 4 -10 intervalos x 1 min al 90% FC_máx,1 min de descanso.	No hubo diferencias significativas en las variables de interés.
Malin et al.	2018	Journal of Applied Physiology	USA	n = 17 A n = 14 HIIT	13 días, descanso día 7	A: cicloergómetro, 12S x 60 minutos/S al 70% FC_máx. HIIT: cicloergómetro, 10 intervalos x 3min al 90% FC_máx, 3min al 50% FC_máx.	↓ MC, PTOG ^(**)
Rowan et al.	2017	Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise	Canadá	n = 10 A n = 11 HIIT	12 sem x 3 v/sem	A: banda sin fin, 5 min cal + 28 min al 60%-70% FC_máx + 5 min enf + R 2 veces/sem. HIIT: banda sin fin, 5 min cal + 4 intervalos x 4min al 90% FC_máx, 3 min x 50% - 60% FC_máx + 5 min enf + R 2 veces/sem.	↓ HbA1c, Glu, CC ^(**) ↑ Ins en HIIT
Stuart et al.	2017	Journal of Applied Physiology	USA	n = 9 R	16 sem, 5v/sem	ER: 3-5 ejercicios, 3-4 sets x 5 o 10 repeticiones.	↑ MLG ↓ MG y % grasa

Autores	Año	Revista	País	Puntuación*	Debilidad**
Gidlund et al.	2016	Physiological Reports	Finlandia	4
Langleite et al.	2016	Archives of Physiology and Biochemistry	Noruega	3	Al
Lee et al.	2018	Nutrients	Noruega	3	Al
Safarimosavi et al.	2018	Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.	Irán	4
Eichner et al.	2019	Experimental Physiology	USA	3	Al
Eikenberg et al.	2016	PLoS ONE	USA	2	GC, AL
Gilbertson et al.	2018	Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise	USA	3	GC
Jung et al.	2015	Journal of Diabetes Research	Canadá	3	GC
Malin et al.	2018	Journal of Applied Physiology	USA	3	GC
Rowan et al.	2017	Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise	Canadá	3	GC
Stuart et al.	2017	Journal of Applied Physiology	USA	2	GC, AL