Plain language summary
Advancements in glucose monitoring make assessing free-living postprandial blood glucose levels convenient and feasible. Continuous glucose monitoring systems assess blood glucose levels 24h a day and have been demonstrated to enhance diabetes management. Both acutely and chronically, physical activity and/or exercise is a powerful modulator of glycaemic control. The aim of this study was to examine if the alterations in glycaemic control in older adults who exercise were different compared to young adults who exercise, in response to short-term removal of exercise. This study was a randomised, cross-over, exploratory study design which included 20 participants (9 young, active participants and 11 older, active participants). Participants had glycaemic control assessed for 3 days while performing their normal habitual exercise and for 3 days while refraining from habitual exercise. Results show that three days of exercise removal impairs glycaemic control in older adults as well as young adults. In fact, older adults (even though they have worse glycaemic control than younger adults) do not experience a greater impairment in glycaemic control compared to young adults. Authors conclude that their findings support the overall need for regular, daily exercise in adults, particularly older adults, who have a worse glycaemic profile.
Abstract
Postprandial glycemia (PPG) predicts cardiovascular disease, and short-term physical inactivity increases PPG in young, active adults. Whether this occurs in older, active adults who may be more prone to bouts of inactivity is unknown. This study determined if postprandial interstitial glucose (PPIG) was impaired in active older adults following the removal of exercise for 3 days (NOEX) compared to active young adults. In this randomized, crossover study, 11 older (69.1 ± 1.9 years) and 9 young (32.8 ± 1.8 years) habitually active (≥90 min/week of exercise) adults completed 3-days of NOEX and 3-days of normal habitual exercise (EX), separated by ≥1 week. Diet was standardized across phases. Glycemic control (3-day average) was assessed via continuous glucose monitoring during both phases. Significant main effects of age and phase were detected (p < 0.05), but no interaction was found for steps/day (p > 0.05) (old EX: 6283 ± 607, old NOEX 2380 ± 382 and young EX: 8798 ± 623, young NOEX 4075 ± 516 steps/day). Significant main effects of age (p = 0.002) and time (p < 0.001) existed for 1-h PPIG, but no effect of phase or interactions was found (p > 0.05). Significant main effects (p < 0.05) of age (old: 114 ± 1 mg/dl, young: 106 ± 1 mg/dl), phase (NOEX: 112 ± 1 mg/dl, EX: 108 ± 1 mg/dl), and time (0 min: 100 ± 2, 30 min: 118 ± 2, 60 min: 116 ± 2, 90 min: 111 ± 2, 120 min: 108 ± 2 mg/dl) in 2-h PPIG were detected, but no interaction was found (p > 0.05). However, only significant main effects of phase (NOEX: 14 ± 1 and EX:12 ± 1, p > 0.05) were found for 24-h blood glucose standard deviation. Older adults appear to have impaired glycemic control compared to young adults and exercise removal impairs glycemic control in both populations. Yet, the impairment in glycemic control with exercise removal is not different between old and young adults.
Methodological quality
Jadad score
:
3
Allocation concealment
:
Yes
