Intensive Lifestyle Changes Are Necessary to Improve Insulin Sensitivity
A randomized controlled trial
- Kirsten A. McAuley, MBCHB1,
- Sheila M. Williams, BSC2,
- Jim I. Mann, DM, PHD1,
- Ailsa Goulding, PHD, FACN3,
- Alex Chisholm, PHD1,
- Noela Wilson, PHD4,
- Gretchen Story, BPHED1,
- Rebecca T. McLay, MSC1,
- Michelle J. Harper, BSC1 and
- Ianthe E. Jones, MSC3
- 1Department of Human Nutrition, Otago University, Dunedin, New Zealand
- 2Department of Preventive and Social Medicine, Otago University, Dunedin, New Zealand
- 3Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Otago University, Dunedin, New Zealand
- 4Life in New Zealand Activity and Health Research Unit, Otago University, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE—The extent to which lifestyle must be altered to improve insulin sensitivity has not been established. This study compares the effect on insulin sensitivity of current dietary and exercise recommendations with a more intensive intervention in normoglycemic insulin-resistant individuals.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—Seventy-nine normoglycemic insulin-resistant (determined by the euglycemic insulin clamp) men and women were randomized to either a control group or one of two combined dietary and exercise programs. One group (modest level) was based on current recommendations and the other on a more intensive dietary and exercise program. Insulin sensitivity was measured using a euglycemic insulin clamp, body composition was measured using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, and anthropometry and aerobic fitness were assessed before and after a 4-month intervention period. Four-day dietary intakes were recorded, and fasting glucose, insulin, and lipids were measured.
RESULTS—Only the intensive group showed a significant improvement in insulin sensitivity (23% increase, P=0.006 vs. 9% in the modest group, P=0.23). This was associated with a significant improvement in aerobic fitness (11% increase in the intensive group, P=0.02 vs. 1% in the modest group, P=0.94) and a greater fiber intake, but no difference in reported total or saturated dietary fat.
CONCLUSIONS—Current clinical dietary and exercise recommendations, even when vigorously implemented, did not significantly improve insulin sensitivity; however, a more intensive program did. Improved aerobic fitness appeared to be the major difference between the two intervention groups, although weight loss and diet composition may have also played an important role in determining insulin sensitivity.
- DXA, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry
- Gbw, glucose infused for total body weight
- Gffm, glucose infused for fat-free mass
- IGT, impaired glucose tolerance
- OGTT, oral glucose tolerance test
- VLCD, very low–calorie diet
Footnotes
-
Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Kirsten McAuley, Department of Human Nutrition, Otago University, P.O. Box 56, Dunedin, New Zealand. E-mail: kirsten.mcauley{at}stonebow.otago.ac.nz.
Received for publication 23 May 2001 and accepted in revised form 6 December 2001.
A table elsewhere in this issue shows conventional and Système International (SI) units and conversion factors for many substances.
- DIABETES CARE














