Most studies that explored the health benefits of interrupting sitting time focused on using different modalities (i.e., comparing walking vs standing breaks)33,36,59. However, experimental studies that directly compare patterns of interrupting sitting time through standing only are needed to advance the field. This study aimed to (i) determine if there is a difference in glucose response between continuous sitting (CS) and two intermittent standing regimes (high frequency, low duration breaks (HFLD) and low frequency, high duration breaks (LFHD)) and (ii) to determine if there is a difference in glucose response between the two strategies (HFLD vs. LFHD).

Ten sedentary employees (mean±SD age 46.8±10.6 years; 70% female) with impaired fasting glucose (mean glucose= 109.0±9.8 mg/dL) participated. Eligible participants were invited to three 7.5 hour laboratory visits where they were randomized to perform each study conditions: (i) CS, (ii) HFLD and (iii) LFHD. Standardized meals (breakfast and lunch) were given with each meal providing 33% of the participant’s total daily caloric needs following a typical American diet (50-60% carbohydrates, 25-30% fat, and 10-20% protein). Participants wore an activPAL device to measure compliance with the sit-stand condition and a continuous glucose monitor to measure post-prandial glucose response. Post-prandial mean glucose, incremental area under the curve and mean amplitude glycemic excursion between conditions were evaluated using linear mixed models.

Participants demonstrated high compliance with the study condition. The results indicated that the mean glucose of the HFLD condition were significantly lower (p< .01) than the CS condition with mean difference of -7.70 (-11.98, -3.42) mg/dL·3.5h and -5.76 (-9.50, -2.03) mg/dL·7h for lunch and total time, respectively. Furthermore, the mean post-prandial glucose during lunch and total time were significantly lower in the HFLD condition compared to the LFHD condition with mean difference of -9.94 (-14.13, -5.74) mg/dL·3.5h and -6.23 (-9.93, -2.52) mg/dL·7h, respectively. No differences were found between the CS and LFHD conditions.

This study provides evidence favoring the use of frequent interruptions in sitting time to improve glycemic control of prediabetic individuals. In contrast, less frequent, although longer bouts of standing resulted in similar post-prandial glucose profile to that of the continuous sitting condition despite total standing time being equal to the LFHD condition.

Cardiovascular disease attributed to about 800,000 deaths per year and is the leading cause of all-cause mortality in the U.S. Previous studies indicate that reducing sedentary time or increasing physical activity (PA) can independently reduce cardiometabolic risk (CMR). Further, studies have shown that higher levels of moderate-to-vigorous PA can attenuate the negative effects of sedentary behavior on CMR.
In this study, we evaluated the association between sedentary time, light-intensity PA (LPA), and moderate-vigorous PA (MVPA) and CMR biomarkers (high density lipoprotein level, low density lipoprotein level, triglycerides, fasting glucose, total cholesterol, blood pressure, and body mass index). Additionally, we examined if the detrimental association between sedentary time and CMR biomarkers is partially or fully attenuated by MVPA. Baseline objective physical activity and cardiometabolic risk data from a two-arm-cluster randomized trial (Stand&Move@work) were used in this study. Multilevel models clustered by worksite evaluated the fixed effects and interaction between MVPA and sedentary time on CMR. Data from 630 sedentary working adults (from 24 worksites) were included in the analysis. The sample was mainly middle aged (44.6±11.2) females (74%) with race distributions as follows; 70.5% white, 13.8% hispanic, 4.1% black, 5.1% asian, and 2.1% other. Our study showed detrimental trends consistent with previous studies between sedentary behavior and cardiometabolic outcomes including HDL, LDL, and total cholesterol. MVPA demonstrated beneficial associations with lipoproteins including HDL, LDL, total cholesterol, and triglycerides. We observed that high levels of MVPA may be able to partially attenuate the negative effects of highly sedentary behavior on fasting glucose, total cholesterol, and LDL levels. Overall, sedentary behavior indicated deleterious associations with cardiometabolic outcomes. Future directions for this study could examine a more at-risk population or a highly active population for further assessment of CMR biomarkers and the effects of behavior.