PMID 30541346

Research
All papers

Unsupervised high-intensity interval training improves glycaemic control but not cardiovascular autonomic function in type 2 diabetes patients: A randomised controlled trial

Question

Does unsupervised HIIT improve glycaemic control and cardiovascular autonomic function in adults with type 2 diabetes compared with standard care?

Summary

Adults with type 2 diabetes were randomized to 12 weeks of mostly unsupervised gym-based cycling HIIT or standard care. The HIIT group completed all sessions and had better between-group HbA1c change than control, but cardiovascular autonomic measures such as heart-rate variability, blood-pressure variability, and baroreflex sensitivity did not improve meaningfully. The study was small, powered for HbA1c rather than autonomic function, and used a clinical type 2 diabetes population.

Methodology

  • Adults with type 2 diabetes stable on diet and/or metformin, obese on average, randomized to HIIT or standard care.
  • 22 participants.
  • Cycle ergometer with light band-resisted upper-body exercise during recovery.
  • Work intervals: 2 minutes in week 1, progressing by 10 seconds per week to 3 minutes 50 seconds in week 12.
  • Recovery: 3 minutes after each interval: 90 seconds passive, 60 seconds light band exercise, 30 seconds preparation; 3-minute recovery cycle after final interval.
  • Intensity: Pedal cadence >80 rpm and RPE 16-17 (very hard).
  • Approximately 30 to 39 minutes based on reported structure.
  • 3 sessions/week on non-consecutive days.
  • 12 weeks.
  • Randomized controlled trial comparing 12 weeks of HIIT with standard care.
  • HbA1c, Heart rate variability, Blood pressure variability, and Baroreflex receptor sensitivity were tracked.

Outcomes

HbA1c

Between-group HbA1c change favored HIIT: intervention changed from 7.13 +/- 0.31% to 6.87 +/- 0.29%, while control changed from 7.18 +/- 0.17% to 7.36 +/- 0.21%.

Between-group P = 0.03.

Improved

Heart rate variability

No significant between-group changes in RRI, SDNN, LF/HF, or related HRV measures.

Examples from abstract: RRI P = 0.672; RRI LF/HF P = 0.203.

No clear change

Blood pressure variability

Most BPV measures did not differ between groups, but systolic BP high-frequency normalized units worsened/decreased in the HIIT group.

SBP HFnu changed from 19 +/- 4 to 15 +/- 3 in HIIT and 28 +/- 5 to 28 +/- 3 in control; between-group P = 0.003. SBP LF/HF P = 0.169.

Mixed

Baroreflex receptor sensitivity

HIIT did not significantly improve baroreflex receptor sensitivity compared with control.

Total slope mean between-group P = 0.150 in Table 3.

No clear change

Baseline HbA1c and baroreflex sensitivity association

Higher HbA1c at baseline was associated with lower baroreflex receptor sensitivity.

rs = -0.592, P = 0.004.

Mixed

Adherence

Analyzed intervention participants achieved maximal attendance and none dropped out.

36 +/- 0.9 sessions attended over 12 weeks.

Improved

Insights

  • A structured mostly unsupervised cycle HIIT program can produce high adherence and improve HbA1c in carefully screened adults with type 2 diabetes.
  • Short-term glycaemic improvement should not be translated into claims of improved cardiovascular autonomic regulation.
  • Clinical HIIT programming needs explicit screening, contraindication, and medication boundaries.

Limitations

  • Small sample size.
  • Powered for HbA1c rather than autonomic function outcomes.
  • Six randomized participants were lost during the study.
  • Mostly male clinical sample.
  • Intervention aimed to maintain weight, so findings do not test weight-loss-oriented HIIT.
  • Control group changes in some autonomic measures were not fully explained.

Safety

  • No adverse events or injuries were reported in the paper.
  • Participants were screened by medical history, physical examination, ECG, and exercise stress testing.
  • Overt cardiac disease, beta-blocker therapy, and exercise stress-test contraindications were exclusion criteria.