Feasibility of REHIT in NDH Patients

University of Huddersfield6 enrolled

Overview

The aim of this feasibility study was to describe and report data relevant to the acceptability of an exercise intervention (reduced-exertion, high-intensity interval training) in non-diabetic hyperglycaemia patients delivered in a National Health Service setting.

Background Physical activity and exercise interventions to improve health frequently bring about intended effects under ideal circumstances but fail to demonstrate effectiveness when translated to demonstrable benefits in real-world contexts. The aim of this feasibility study was to describe and report data relevant to the acceptability of an exercise intervention (reduced-exertion, high-intensity interval training) in non-diabetic hyperglycaemia (NDH) patients delivered in a National Health Service (NHS) setting. Individuals with NDH are an intermediary group of patients whose blood glucose levels are higher than normal but not high enough to be diagnosed as diabetic. Such hyperglycaemic blood glucose excursions in 'pre-diabetic' states contribute to the development of macro- and micro-vascular disease risk and increases the risk of developing overt type 2 diabetes. Interventions - such as increased physical activity - for individuals who are diagnostically considered to have NDH are high priority, as they provide a substantial opportunity for preventing future burden of diabetes on patients, the NHS, and the economy. Evidence supporting the efficacy of exercise and physical activity as preventative or therapeutic treatments for a range of chronic diseases, including obesity and diabetes, is incontrovertible. However, exercise adherence is considered a significant issue. The most commonly cited barrier to undertaking physical activity is perceived 'lack of time'. Consequently, there has been a recent interest in high-intensity interval training (HIT) which is characterised by brief periods of repeated very high-intensity exercise interspersed with longer periods of recovery. More recently attempts have been made to modify HIT to make it more time-efficient and tolerable. This approach is known as reduced-exertion, high-intensity interval training (REHIT). In this study, issues of acceptability and feasibility were considered when implementing a REHIT intervention into usual care within an NHS setting. Methods The purpose was to assess whether it would be appropriate to progress to a larger-scale pragmatic trial, and to optimise the design and conduct of any such trial. The intention was to recruit 40 participants from a single centre (specialist diabesity centre). Patients were eligible to take part if they were diagnostically defined as non-diabetic hyperglycaemic based on a glycated haemoglobin value of 42-46 mmol·mol. Methodological issues were used to analyse problems that arose.

Study Type

INTERVENTIONAL

Allocation

Purpose

PREVENTION

Masking

NONE

Enrollment

Conditions

Diabetes Physical Activity

Interventions

Exercise interventionOTHER

Exercise intervention (reduced-exertion, high-intensity interval training) delivered within an NHS setting. Consisted 10 min of cycle ergometry (inclusive of warm-up and cool down) including very brief maximal cycle sprints.

Usual careBEHAVIORAL

Members of a multi-disciplinary team including a consultant, diabetes specialist nurse, clinical psychologist, physiotherapist, and dietician worked together to promote patient self-management. Care was tailored to the specific circumstances of each patient after initial assessment and focussed on weight management, dietary education, behavioural therapy, and supported pharmacotherapy initiation as appropriate.

Eligibility

Sex: ALLMin age: 18 YearsMax age: 65 YearsHealthy volunteers:

Medical Language ↔ Plain English

Inclusion Criteria: * Accessing the NHS Trust Weight Management Service (Specialist Diabesity Clinic) * Aged between 18 and 65 years (inclusive) * Diagnosed as NDH (using standard criteria) * Male or female * Any ethnicity * Not currently partaking in a new structured exercise intervention * Considered low or medium risk for exercise using standard risk stratification \[37\] Exclusion Criteria: * \< 18 years and ≥ 66 years * Currently partaking in a new structured exercise intervention * Euglycaemic * Diagnosed with type 1 or type 2 diabetes; taking insulin; history of end stage liver or kidney disease, neuropathy or retinopathy; has hypertension that cannot be controlled by standard medication; has cardiovascular disease, or another contraindication to exercise * Considered high risk for exercise using standard risk stratification \[37\] * Unable to adequately understand verbal explanations and written information given in English (there were no funds available for translation services)

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Number of patients screened and considered eligible to take part in the study

Defined as the number of patients who had contact with the recruitment team and who were assessed for eligibility using inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Time frame: 4-weeks

Reporting of adverse events

An adverse event was defined as any untoward occurrence that happened during the conduct of the study.

Time frame: From first exposure to intervention to last (approx. 6-weeks)

Intervention adherence

Intervention adherence was calculated by summing the total number of participants and the target number of REHIT sessions (15 per participant) and comparing this against the actual completed sessions.

Time frame: From first exposure to intervention to last (approx. 6-weeks)

Change in affective valence (pleasure-displeasure)

Pre-validated 'Feeling Scale' questionnaire which measure pleasure/displeasure responses during exercise. This is a single-item, 11-point, bipolar scale and ranges from - 5 'very bad' to + 5 'very good', with anchors designated for 0 (neutral) and all odd integers in-between. Lower scores are considered to be a worse outcome.

Time frame: Change from first exposure to intervention to last (approx. 6 weeks)

Change in perceived exertion

Pre-validated 'Rating of Perceived Exertion' questionnaire which measures perceived effort during exercise. This is a 15-point scale and ranges from 6 'no exertion' to 20 'maximal exertion' with anchors designated for all the odd integers in-between. A higher score is considered a worse outcome.

Time frame: Change from first exposure to intervention to last (approx. 6 weeks)

Change in enjoyment

Pre-validated 'Exercise Enjoyment Scale' (ESS) which measures enjoyment associated with exercise. This is a single-item, 7-point scale. Anchors are given at every integer, ranging from 1 'not at all' to 7 'extremely'. A lower score is a worse outcome.

Data from ClinicalTrials.gov

This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.