Effects of Motor-Assisted and Functional Electrical Stimulation Cyclings on Postprandial Glucose in Older Adults with Type 2 Diabetes and Activities of Daily Living Disability
Description
Background: Effective glucose management using exercise modalities in older patients with type 2 diabetes and activities of daily living (ADL) disabilities are unknown.
Purpose: The study investigated the acute effects of motor-assisted cycling and functional electrical stimulation (FES) cycling on the 2-h postprandial glucose responses compared with sitting control in older adults with type 2 diabetes and ADL disabilities.
Methods: The study used a 3×3 crossover study design. Nine participants were randomly assigned to one of the three treatment sequences: ABC, BCA, and CAB. (A, motor-assisted cycling; B, FES cycling; C, sitting control). Linear mixed models (LMM) with Bonferroni post-hoc tests were used to test the mean differences for the 2-h postprandial glucose, estimated by the area under the curve (AUC) and incremental AUC (iAUC), between intervention and control treatments after adjustment for covariates (e.g., age, sex, and race).
Results: There were significant mean differences for iAUC (p = 0.005) and AUC (p = 0.038) across motor-assisted cycling, control, and FES cycling treatments. The FES cycling had a lower mean of 2-hour postprandial iAUC as compared with sitting control (iAUC 3.98 mmol∙h/L vs 6.92 mmol∙h/L, p = 0.006, effect size [ES] = 1.72) and the motor-assisted cycling (iAUC, 3.98 mmol∙h/L vs 6.19 mmol∙h/L , p = 0.0368, ES = 1.29), respectively. The FES cycling also had a lower mean of the 2-hour postprandial AUC as compared with sitting control (AUC, 18.29 mmol∙h/L vs 20.95 mmol∙h/L, p = 0.043, ES = 0.89), but had an AUC similar to the motor-assisted cycling (18.29 mmol∙h/L vs 20.23 mmol∙h/L , p = 0.183, ES = 0.19). There were no statistical differences in iAUC (6.19 mmol∙h/L vs 6.92 mmol∙h/L) and AUC (20.23 mmol∙h/L vs 20.95 mmol∙h/L) between the motor-assisted cycling and sitting control (all p>0.05).
Conclusion: Performing 30 minutes of FES cycling on a motor-assisted bike (40 Hz, 39 rpm, 25-29 mA) significantly decreased the 2-h postprandial glucose levels in older adults with type 2 diabetes and ADL disabilities. These findings suggested that FES cycling can be a promising exercise modality for glucose management in diabetic patients with ADL disabilities.
Purpose: The study investigated the acute effects of motor-assisted cycling and functional electrical stimulation (FES) cycling on the 2-h postprandial glucose responses compared with sitting control in older adults with type 2 diabetes and ADL disabilities.
Methods: The study used a 3×3 crossover study design. Nine participants were randomly assigned to one of the three treatment sequences: ABC, BCA, and CAB. (A, motor-assisted cycling; B, FES cycling; C, sitting control). Linear mixed models (LMM) with Bonferroni post-hoc tests were used to test the mean differences for the 2-h postprandial glucose, estimated by the area under the curve (AUC) and incremental AUC (iAUC), between intervention and control treatments after adjustment for covariates (e.g., age, sex, and race).
Results: There were significant mean differences for iAUC (p = 0.005) and AUC (p = 0.038) across motor-assisted cycling, control, and FES cycling treatments. The FES cycling had a lower mean of 2-hour postprandial iAUC as compared with sitting control (iAUC 3.98 mmol∙h/L vs 6.92 mmol∙h/L, p = 0.006, effect size [ES] = 1.72) and the motor-assisted cycling (iAUC, 3.98 mmol∙h/L vs 6.19 mmol∙h/L , p = 0.0368, ES = 1.29), respectively. The FES cycling also had a lower mean of the 2-hour postprandial AUC as compared with sitting control (AUC, 18.29 mmol∙h/L vs 20.95 mmol∙h/L, p = 0.043, ES = 0.89), but had an AUC similar to the motor-assisted cycling (18.29 mmol∙h/L vs 20.23 mmol∙h/L , p = 0.183, ES = 0.19). There were no statistical differences in iAUC (6.19 mmol∙h/L vs 6.92 mmol∙h/L) and AUC (20.23 mmol∙h/L vs 20.95 mmol∙h/L) between the motor-assisted cycling and sitting control (all p>0.05).
Conclusion: Performing 30 minutes of FES cycling on a motor-assisted bike (40 Hz, 39 rpm, 25-29 mA) significantly decreased the 2-h postprandial glucose levels in older adults with type 2 diabetes and ADL disabilities. These findings suggested that FES cycling can be a promising exercise modality for glucose management in diabetic patients with ADL disabilities.
Date Created
The date the item was original created (prior to any relationship with the ASU Digital Repositories.)
2019
Agent
- Author (aut): ma, tongyu
- Thesis advisor (ths): Lee, Chong
- Committee member: Hooker, Steven
- Committee member: Shaibi, Gabriel
- Committee member: Johnston, Carol
- Committee member: Ringenbach, Shannon
- Publisher (pbl): Arizona State University