Denise Maria Martins Vancea et al. José Nelson Vancea Maria Izabel Fernandes Pires Marco Antonio Reis … Rafael Brandão Moura Sergio Atala Dib
BACKGROUND: Diabetes and cardiovascular disease have emerged as key threats to human health, and the risk is increased in individuals with visceral obesity. The consensus is that physical exercise should be part of the treatment of diabetes mellitus (DM). OBJECTIVE: To compare the influence of guided and structured physical exercise programs (SPEP), three to five times per week, during a period of 20 weeks, on glycemic control and body composition of type 2 diabetic patients (DM2). METHODS: The research was conducted at the Universidade Federal de São Paulo (Federal University School of Medicine in São Paulo). At the clinical visit, patients from the Control Group (CG) n=17, mean age 55.8 years, were encouraged to engage in a physical exercise program. Patients from Group 3x (G3), n=14, mean age 57.4 years, were to engage in 1 hour of physical exercise, 3x/week, and Group 5x (G5), n=9, mean age 58.8 years, followed the same protocol but 5x/week. Mean of 5 years since diagnosis in all groups. Classes consisted of a 5-minute warm-up, 30-minute treadmill walk at 70% of maximum heart rate, and 10-minute relaxation. BMI, abdominal circumference (AC), percentage of body fat (BF), capillary glycemia (CG), fasting glycemia (FG), and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) were assessed. RESULTS: A comparison was made between the baseline time point (B) and the 20th week (20th). BMI in G3 (B:29.5±2.9 vs. 20th: 28.3 ± 2.2 Kg/sqm, p=0.005) and G5 (B:29.7±4.4 vs. 20th: 29.1 ± 4.3 Kg/sqm, p=0.025); abdominal circumference in G5 (B:100.5±11.9 vs. 20th: 933 ± 11.7 cm, p=0.001); BF in G3 (B:31±5.1 vs 20th: 26±5%, p=0.001) and G5 (B:32.4 ± 5.4 vs. 20th: 30.3 ± 6.9%, p=0.001); FG, G5 (B:150.8 ± 47.5 vs. 20th: 109.2± 30.5 mg/dL, p=0.034), showed statistically significant differences. CG did not show statistically significant differences for these variables. CG showed a tendency to drop after physical exercise in G5. HbA1c showed no statistically significant differences in the three groups. CONCLUSION: G5 did better than G3 in most parameters assessed. However, results failed to show a decrease of HbA1c in DM2 patients.