The Effect of High-Intensity Power Training on Habitual, Intervention and Total Physical Activity Levels in Older Adults with Type 2 Diabetes: Secondary Outcomes of the GREAT2DO Randomized Controlled Trial
We examined the effect of power training on habitual, intervention and total physical activity (PA) levels in older adults with type 2 diabetes and their relationship to metabolic control.
103 adults with type 2 diabetes were randomized to receive supervised power training or sham exercise three times/week for 12 months. Habitual, intervention, and total PA, as well as insulin resistance (HOMA2-IR) and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), were measured.
Participants were aged 67.9 ± 5.5 yrs, with well-controlled diabetes (HbA1c = 7.1%) and higher than average habitual PA levels compared to healthy peers. Habitual PA did not change significantly over 12 months (p = 0.74), and there was no effect of group assignment on change over time in habitual PA over 0-6 (p = 0.16) or 0-6-12 months (p = 0.51). By contrast, intervention PA, leg press tonnage and total PA increased over both 6- and 12-month timepoints (p = 0.0001), and these changes were significantly greater in the power training compared to the sham exercise group across timepoints (p = 0.0001). However, there were no associations between changes in any PA measures over time and changes in metabolic profile.
Structured high-intensity power training may be an effective strategy to enhance overall PA in this high-risk cohort.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 February 2021.
All research outputs
#14,552,599
of 23,305,591 outputs
Outputs from Geriatrics
#272
of 487 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#273,074
of 508,965 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Geriatrics
#13
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,305,591 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 487 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 508,965 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
