Performance
A · High confidenceResistance training and the blood sugar marker HbA1c in type 2 diabetes
Subject: Effect of resistance training on HbA1c in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus and the moderating effect of changes in muscular strength: a systematic review and meta-analysis
What this means
Resistance training lowered HbA1c (average blood sugar over time) more than in control groups. Larger strength gains went with larger drops. There was no clear difference from aerobic training.
Jansson AK, Chan LX, Lubans DR, Duncan MJ, Plotnikoff RC · 2022 · BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care
What does this rating mean?
Multiple consistent meta-analyses or a position stand. Sufficient basis for a fixed choice in the coaching.
Findings
Resistance training alone produced a small but significant reduction in HbA1c of about 0.39 percentage points versus control. The size of the strength improvement significantly moderated the glycaemic benefit: larger strength gains went with larger HbA1c reductions. Resistance training was not significantly different from aerobic training.
Who this applies to
Adults with type 2 diabetes.
Size of the research
Twenty randomized controlled trials with 1172 participants in total.
What to keep in mind
Results varied considerably between studies. Only articles published in English were included.
Practical conclusion for REZA
An argument, in consultation with the treating clinician, for deliberately targeting strength gains with type 2 diabetes clients: in this analysis, greater strength gains went with larger HbA1c reductions. Resistance training does not replace medical treatment.
View method and source
Methodology
Meta-analysis
Population
30 RCTs published 1998-2020 in the systematic review; primary meta-analysis 20 studies, n=1172 adults aged ≥18 y with type 2 diabetes
Intervention
Resistance training only (RT combined with aerobic exercise or diet was excluded) vs. control, wait-list control or sham exercise; secondary comparison vs. aerobic training
Outcome measures
HbA1c (primary); moderators: change in muscular strength/fitness, risk of bias, intervention duration
Limitations
Moderate-to-high heterogeneity (I2=69.2%); no included study achieved overall low risk of bias; internal inconsistency in reported study/participant counts; only 12 of 20 primary-analysis studies measured muscular strength.
Original source
DOI: 10.1136/bmjdrc-2021-002595 · PMID: 35273011
View on PubMed →Exercise/Physical Activity in Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes: A Consensus Statement from the American College of Sports Medicine
Next study →Impact of concurrent training versus aerobic or resistance training on cardiorespiratory fitness and muscular strength in middle-aged to older adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis
This information is general education about scientific research. It is not personal medical advice and does not replace diagnosis or treatment by a doctor or other healthcare professional. If you have symptoms, a medical condition or take medication, consult your GP or treating professional before changing your training or nutrition.