Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Objective: This study evaluated the effectiveness of different walking protocols on various physiological and psychological factors in type 2 diabetes (T2D). Materials and methods: In this randomized study, 45 individuals with T2D, aged 55–65 years, with diabetes duration between 1 and 10 years were recruited. They were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups: single walking (SW), accumulated walking (AW), or conventional walking (CW). The primary outcome measure was fasting blood glucose (FBG) while secondary outcomes assessed were 6-minute walk distance (6MWD), fatigue, and quality of life (QoL). Intervention was given for 6 weeks. Intra-group changes were analyzed using the Wilcoxon signed rank test, while inter-group differences were evaluated with the Kruskal-Wallis test. Results: 42 participants completed the study. The baseline data showed non-significant difference across the groups for age and duration of diabetes. FBG showed a minor reduction in the SW (12%) and AW (15.5%) groups, while it increased in the CW group (2.5%). The 6MWD improved significantly in the SW (21.3%, p = 0.003) and AW (21%, p = 0.008) groups, but decreased in the CW (9.5%) group. Fatigue decreased in the SW (4.5%, p = 0.027) and AW (4.8%, p = 0.003) groups, while it slightly increased in the CW (0.5%) group. QoL improved in the SW (2.3%, p = 0.016) and AW (4.3%, p = 0.008) groups but decreased in the CW (1.78%) group. Post-hoc analysis showed significant differences in 6MWD (p = 0.010) and QoL (p = 0.008) between the AW and CW groups. Conclusions: SW and AW showed similar effects on glucose levels, aerobic capacity, fatigue, and QoL. However, AW is more effective than CW in enhancing aerobic capacity and QoL.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mendon et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: