Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026
Comparative effectiveness of high-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ren Pengbo, Zhang Jian, Li Shi, Li Tingwen
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To systematically evaluate and compare the effects of High-Intensity Interval Training (HIIT) and Moderate-Intensity Continuous Training (MICT) on key glycemic indicators and related metabolic parameters in patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM).
METHODS: Databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CNKI, and Wanfang were searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to October 2025 on HIIT and MICT in T2DM. Two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies. A meta-analysis was then performed using RevMan 5.4.
RESULTS: A total of 21 RCTs involving 831 T2DM patients were included. The meta-analysis results showed that compared to a normal control group, both HIIT and MICT significantly reduced fasting blood glucose (FBG) and increased patients' VO2max levels. HIIT significantly reduced patients' glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels, body mass index (BMI), and significantly increased high-density lipoprotein (HDL) levels. Compared to MICT, HIIT was more effective in reducing FBG and provided a greater increase in maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max). Both HIIT and MICT effectively reduced HbA1c in T2DM patients, although there was no significant difference in the effect between the two modalities. Regarding BMI, low-density lipoprotein (LDL), and HDL, the two exercise modalities did not show statistically significant differences.
CONCLUSION: In the management of T2DM, HIIT offers greater advantages in improving FBG and enhancing VO2max, providing a basis for the scientific and effective management of T2DM. However, due to the limitations in the number and quality of the included studies, the above conclusions require verification through more high-quality research.
METHODS: Databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CNKI, and Wanfang were searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to October 2025 on HIIT and MICT in T2DM. Two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies. A meta-analysis was then performed using RevMan 5.4.
RESULTS: A total of 21 RCTs involving 831 T2DM patients were included. The meta-analysis results showed that compared to a normal control group, both HIIT and MICT significantly reduced fasting blood glucose (FBG) and increased patients' VO2max levels. HIIT significantly reduced patients' glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels, body mass index (BMI), and significantly increased high-density lipoprotein (HDL) levels. Compared to MICT, HIIT was more effective in reducing FBG and provided a greater increase in maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max). Both HIIT and MICT effectively reduced HbA1c in T2DM patients, although there was no significant difference in the effect between the two modalities. Regarding BMI, low-density lipoprotein (LDL), and HDL, the two exercise modalities did not show statistically significant differences.
CONCLUSION: In the management of T2DM, HIIT offers greater advantages in improving FBG and enhancing VO2max, providing a basis for the scientific and effective management of T2DM. However, due to the limitations in the number and quality of the included studies, the above conclusions require verification through more high-quality research.