Replacing sitting with light-intensity physical activity throughout the day versus 1 bout of vigorous-intensity exercise: similar cardiometabolic health effects in multiple sclerosis. A randomised cross-over study.

PURPOSE: Persons with Multiple Sclerosis (PwMS) are physically inactive and spend more time in sedentary behaviours than healthy persons, which increases the risk of developing cardiometabolic diseases. In this randomised crossover study, the cardiometabolic health effects of replacing sitting with light-intensity physical activity (LIPA) and exercise (EX) were investigated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-eight mildly disabled PwMS performed four 4-day activity regimens in free-living conditions; CONTROL (habitual activity), SIT, LIPA, and EX. Plasma glucose and insulin (oral glucose tolerance test), plasma lipids, inflammation, resting heart rate, blood pressure, body weight, and perceived exertion were measured (clinical-trials.gov: NCT03919058). RESULTS: CONTROL: 9.7 h sitting/day, SIT: 13.3 h sitting/day, LIPA: 8.3 h sitting, 4.7 h standing, and 2.7 h light-intensity walking/day, and EX: 11.6 h sitting/day with 1.3 h vigorous-intensity cycling. Compared to SIT, improvements (p < 0.001) after LIPA and EX were found for insulin total area under the curve (-17 019 ± 5708 and -23 303 ± 7953 pmol/L*min), insulin sensitivity (Matsuda index +1.8 ± 0.3 and +1.9 ± 0.4) and blood lipids (triglycerides: -0.4 ± 0.1 and -0.5 ± 0.1 mmol/L; non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol: -0.3 ± 0.1 and -0.5 ± 0.1 mmol/L), with no difference between LIPA and EX. Perceived exertion was higher after EX compared to LIPA (Borg score [6-20]: +2.6 ± 3.3, p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Replacing sitting with LIPA throughout the day exerts similar cardiometabolic health effects as a vigorous-intensity exercise in PwMS.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONIncreasing light-intensity physical activity (LIPA) throughout the day improves cardiometabolic health to the same extent as one vigorous-intensity exercise sessionIncreasing LIPA induces less exertion than performing a vigorous-intensity exercise.

Sitting less elicits metabolic responses similar to exercise and enhances insulin sensitivity in postmenopausal women.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: In our current society sedentary behaviour predominates in most people and is associated with the risk of developing type 2 diabetes. It has been suggested that replacing sitting time by standing and walking could be beneficial for individuals with type 2 diabetes but the underlying mechanisms are unknown and direct comparisons with exercise are lacking. Our objective was to directly compare metabolic responses of either sitting less or exercising, relative to being sedentary. METHODS: We performed a randomised, crossover intervention study in 12 overweight women who performed three well-controlled 4 day activity regimens: (1) sitting regimen (sitting 14 h/day); (2) exercise regimen (sitting 13 h/day, exercise 1 h/day); and (3) sitting less regimen (sitting 9 h/day, standing 4 h/day and walking 3 h/day). The primary outcome was insulin sensitivity measured by a two-step hyperinsulinaemic-euglycaemic clamp. We additionally performed metabolomics on muscle biopsies taken before the clamp to identify changes at the molecular level. RESULTS: Replacing sitting time by standing and walking over 4 days resulted in improved peripheral insulin sensitivity, comparable with the improvement achieved by moderate-to-vigorous exercise. Specifically, we report a significant improvement in peripheral insulin sensitivity in the sitting less (~13%) and the exercise regimen (~20%), compared with the sitting regimen. Furthermore, sitting less shifted the underlying muscle metabolome towards that seen with moderate-to-vigorous exercise, compared with the sitting regimen. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATIONS: Replacing sitting time by standing and walking is an attractive alternative to moderate-to-vigorous exercise for improving metabolic health. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03912922.

Reducing sitting time versus adding exercise: differential effects on biomarkers of endothelial dysfunction and metabolic risk.

Recent studies suggest that substituting sitting with light physical activity has beneficial metabolic effects, but it is unclear if this is associated with parallel changes in endothelial function. Data from three randomized cross-over studies were analyzed, in which 61 subjects (with normal weight, overweight and type 2 diabetes) followed different activity regimens (Sit, SitLess and/or Exercise) of four days each. Subjects were instructed to sit 14 h/day ('Sit'), to substitute 1 h/day of sitting with moderate-to-vigorous cycling ('Exercise') or to substitute 5-6 h/day sitting with light-intensity walking and standing ('SitLess'). Physical activity was assessed 24 h/day by accelerometry (ActivPAL) and diet was standardized. Fasted circulating biomarkers of endothelial dysfunction, lipids and insulin sensitivity were assessed the morning after each activity regimen. The endothelial dysfunction score (ED-score) was computed by averaging the Z-scores of the circulating biomarkers of endothelial dysfunction. Compared to Sit, Exercise resulted in lower ED-score, sICAM1 and sE-selectin (p < 0.05), while no significant changes were observed after SitLess. The ED-score, sVCAM1 and sE-selectin were lower after Exercise compared to SitLess (p < 0.05). In contrast, compared to Sit, insulin sensitivity (HOMA2-IR) and plasma lipids (HDL-cholesterol, non-HDL-cholesterol, total cholesterol and Apo B) did not change significantly after Exercise but were improved after SitLess (p < 0.05). In conclusion, light physical activity and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity had a differential effect on risk markers of cardio-metabolic health and suggest the need of both performing structured exercise as well as reducing sitting time on a daily basis.

Benefits of Substituting Sitting with Standing and Walking in Free-Living Conditions for Cardiometabolic Risk Markers, Cognition and Mood in Overweight Adults.

Background: We investigated whether substituting sitting with standing and self-perceived light walking in free-living conditions would improve cardiometabolic risk factors, mood, and cognition in overweight/obese adults. Methods: In a randomized, cross-over study, 24 (m/f: 13/11) sedentary overweight/obese participants (64 ± 7 years, BMI 29 ± 2 kg/m2) followed two activity regimens of each 4 days in free-living conditions: "Sit": sitting 13.5 h/day, standing 1.4 h/day, self-perceived light-intensity walking 0.7 h/day; for "SitLess" these activities lasted 7.6, 4.0, and 4.3 h/day, respectively. Meals were standardized and physical activity was assessed by accelerometry (activPAL). Insulin sensitivity (expressed as Matsuda-index based on an oral glucose tolerance test), circulating lipids, blood pressure, mood (pleasantness and arousal), and cognition were assessed on the morning after the activity regimens. Quality of life and sleep were assessed on the last day of the activity regimens. Results: We observed that AUC (0-190 min) for insulin decreased by 20% after SitLess vs. Sit [10,125 (656) vs. 12,633 (818); p = 0.006]. Insulin sensitivity improved by 16% after SitLess vs. Sit [Matsuda-index, mean (SEM): 6.45 (0.25) vs. 5.58 (0.25) respectively; p = 0.007]. Fasting triglycerides, non-HDL-cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B decreased by 32, 7, and 4% respectively, whereas HDL-cholesterol increased by 7% after SitLess vs. Sit (all p < 0.01). Diastolic blood pressure was lower after SitLess vs. Sit (p < 0.05). Pleasantness (as one marker of mood status) after the oral glucose tolerance test was higher after SitLess vs. Sit (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference between regimens for cognition, quality of life and sleep. Conclusions: Reducing sitting time in free-living conditions markedly improved insulin sensitivity, circulating lipids, and diastolic blood pressure. Substituting sitting with standing and self-perceived light walking is an effective strategy to improve cardiometabolic risk factors in overweight/obese subjects.

Breaking sitting with light activities vs structured exercise: a randomised crossover study demonstrating benefits for glycaemic control and insulin sensitivity in type 2 diabetes.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: We aimed to examine the effects of breaking sitting with standing and light-intensity walking vs an energy-matched bout of structured exercise on 24 h glucose levels and insulin resistance in patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: In a randomised crossover study, 19 patients with type 2 diabetes (13 men/6 women, 63 ± 9 years old) who were not using insulin each followed three regimens under free-living conditions, each lasting 4 days: (1) Sitting: 4415 steps/day with 14 h sitting/day; (2) Exercise: 4823 steps/day with 1.1 h/day of sitting replaced by moderate- to vigorous-intensity cycling (at an intensity of 5.9 metabolic equivalents [METs]); and (3) Sit Less: 17,502 steps/day with 4.7 h/day of sitting replaced by standing and light-intensity walking (an additional 2.5 h and 2.2 h, respectively, compared with the hours spent doing these activities in the Sitting regimen). Blocked randomisation was performed using a block size of six regimen orders using sealed, non-translucent envelopes. Individuals who assessed the outcomes were blinded to group assignment. Meals were standardised during each intervention. Physical activity and glucose levels were assessed for 24 h/day by accelerometry (activPAL) and a glucose monitor (iPro2), respectively. The incremental AUC (iAUC) for 24 h glucose (primary outcome) and insulin resistance (HOMA2-IR) were assessed on days 4 and 5, respectively. RESULTS: The iAUC for 24 h glucose (mean ± SEM) was significantly lower during the Sit Less intervention than in Sitting (1263 ± 189 min × mmol/l vs 1974 ± 324 min × mmol/l; p = 0.002), and was similar between Sit Less and Exercise (Exercise: 1383 ± 194 min × mmol/l; p = 0.499). Exercise failed to improve HOMA2-IR compared with Sitting (2.06 ± 0.28 vs 2.16 ± 0.26; p = 0.177). In contrast, Sit Less (1.89 ± 0.26) significantly reduced HOMA2-IR compared with Exercise (p = 0.015) as well as Sitting (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Breaking sitting with standing and light-intensity walking effectively improved 24 h glucose levels and improved insulin sensitivity in individuals with type 2 diabetes to a greater extent than structured exercise. Thus, our results suggest that breaking sitting with standing and light-intensity walking may be an alternative to structured exercise to promote glycaemic control in patients type 2 diabetes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02371239 FUNDING: : The study was supported by a Kootstra grant from Maastricht University Medical Centre+, and the Dutch Heart Foundation. Financial support was also provided by Novo Nordisk BV, and Medtronic and Roche made the equipment available for continuous glucose monitoring.

Minimal intensity physical activity (standing and walking) of longer duration improves insulin action and plasma lipids more than shorter periods of moderate to vigorous exercise (cycling) in sedentary subjects when energy expenditure is comparable.

BACKGROUND: Epidemiological studies suggest that excessive sitting time is associated with increased health risk, independent of the performance of exercise. We hypothesized that a daily bout of exercise cannot compensate the negative effects of inactivity during the rest of the day on insulin sensitivity and plasma lipids. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Eighteen healthy subjects, age 21±2 year, BMI 22.6±2.6 kgm(-2) followed randomly three physical activity regimes for four days. Participants were instructed to sit 14 hr/day (sitting regime); to sit 13 hr/day and to substitute 1 hr of sitting with vigorous exercise 1 hr (exercise regime); to substitute 6 hrs sitting with 4 hr walking and 2 hr standing (minimal intensity physical activity (PA) regime). The sitting and exercise regime had comparable numbers of sitting hours; compared to the exercise regime, the minimal intensity PA regime had a higher estimated daily energy expenditure (238kcal/day) [corrected]. PA was assessed continuously by an activity monitor (ActivPAL) and a diary. Measurements of insulin sensitivity (oral glucose tolerance test, OGTT) and plasma lipids were performed in the fasting state, the morning after the 4 days of each regime. In the sitting regime, daily energy expenditure was about 500 kcal lower than in both other regimes. Area under the curve for insulin during OGTT was significantly lower after the minimal intensity PA regime compared to both sitting and exercise regimes 6727.3±4329.4 vs 7752.0±3014.4 and 8320.4±5383.7 mU•min/ml, respectively. Triglycerides, non-HDL cholesterol and apolipoprotein B plasma levels improved significantly in the minimal intensity PA regime compared to sitting and showed non-significant trends for improvement compared to exercise. CONCLUSIONS: One hour of daily physical exercise cannot compensate the negative effects of inactivity on insulin level and plasma lipids if the rest of the day is spent sitting. Reducing inactivity by increasing the time spent walking/standing is more effective than one hour of physical exercise, when energy expenditure is kept constant.