Institutional members access full text with Ovid®

Share this article on:

Intermittent Standing but not a Moderate Exercise Bout Reduces Postprandial Glycemia

BENATTI, FABIANA B.1; LARSEN, SIDSEL A.2; KOFOED, KATJA2; NIELSEN, SIGNE T.2; HARDER-LAURIDSEN, NINA M.2; LYNGBÆK, MARK P.2; ERIKSEN, DORTE2; KARSTOFT, KRISTIAN2; KROGH-MADSEN, RIKKE2; PEDERSEN, BENTE K.2; RIED-LARSEN, MATHIAS2,3

Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise: November 2017 - Volume 49 - Issue 11 - p 2305–2314
doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000001354
Applied Sciences

Purpose: This study aimed to determine whether minimum recommended moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA; 30-min bout of continuous moderate-intensity walking) is sufficient to counteract the detrimental effects of prolonged sitting on postprandial metabolism and if there are any effects of breaking up sitting with intermittent standing when achieving minimum recommended MVPA.

Methods: Fourteen (n = 14) physically inactive healthy adult males underwent four intrahospital 27-h interventions: 9-h continuous sitting (SIT), 15-min standing bouts every 30 min during the 9-h sitting (STAND), 30-min moderate-intensity walking bout followed by 8.5 h of sitting (MVPA), and 30-min moderate-intensity walking bout followed by 15-min standing bouts every 30 min during 8.5 h of sitting (MVPA + STAND). Three standardized meals on intervention day (day 1) and breakfast the following day (day 2) were served.

Results: Cumulative postprandial glucose response (incremental area under the curve) was lower in STAND versus SIT (↓27%, P = 0.04, effect size [ES] = −0.7) because of decreases in postprandial glucose after breakfast on day 1 (STAND vs SIT: ↓40%, P = 0.01, ES = −0.7) and day 2 (STAND vs SIT: ↓33%, P = 0.06, ES = −0.6). STAND did not affect postprandial insulin responses. Cumulative postprandial insulin response was lower in MVPA versus SIT (↓18%, P = 0.03, ES = −0.3) and MVPA + STAND versus SIT (↓26%, P = 0.02, ES = −0.4) because of expected exercise-induced decreases in postprandial insulin after breakfast on day 1 only (MVPA vs SIT: ↓36%, P = 0.003, ES = −0.7; MVPA + STAND vs SIT: ↓43%, P = 0.0001, ES = −0.8).

Conclusion: Breaking up prolonged sitting with nonambulatory standing across 9 h acutely reduced postprandial glycemic response during and the day after the intervention independent of insulin levels, whereas a 30-min MVPA bout did not.

1Applied Physiology and Nutrition Research Group, University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, BRAZIL; 2Centre of Inflammation and Metabolism/Centre for Physical Activity Research, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, DENMARK; and 3The Danish Diabetes Academy, Odense, DENMARK

Address for correspondence: Fabiana B. Benatti, Ph.D., Rigshospitalet 7641, Centre of Inflammation and Metabolism/Centre for Physical Activity Research (CIM/CFAS), Blegdamsvej 9, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark; E-mail: fabenatti@usp.br.

Submitted for publication February 2017.

Accepted for publication June 2017.

Supplemental digital content is available for this article. Direct URL citations appear in the printed text and are provided in the HTML and PDF versions of this article on the journal’s Web site (www.acsm-msse.org).

© 2017 American College of Sports Medicine