Panacea Index Logo

Command Palette

Search for a command to run...

Feasibility of yoga as a complementary therapy for patients with type 2 diabetes: The Healthy Active and in Control (HA1C) study.

Complementary therapies in medicine
February 1, 2019
B C Bock et al. (9 authors)
Journal ArticleRandomized Controlled TrialHuman StudyClinical
Study Details

Study Goal

The researchers aimed to examine the feasibility and acceptability of yoga as a complementary therapy for adults with Type-2 Diabetes (T2DM) and compare its effects to a supervised walking program.

Results Summary

The yoga intervention was highly feasible and acceptable, with significant reductions in HbA1c, greater improvements in diabetes self-care, quality of life, and emotional distress, and increased mindfulness compared to the standard exercise group.

Population

Adults with Type-2 Diabetes (T2DM) (30 women, 18 men).

Effective Dosage

Twice weekly Iyengar yoga sessions.

Duration

12 weeks.

Interactions

None mentioned.

Extracted Claims (6)
InterventionDirectionEndpointPopulationDosageImpactClaim #
Iyengar yoga
decrease
HbA1c
adults with Type-2 Diabetes (T2DM)
1.25 units lower at 6 months compared to SE
produced significant reductions
#1
Iyengar yoga
increase
diabetes self-care
adults with Type-2 Diabetes (T2DM)
-
Greater improvements
#2
Iyengar yoga
increase
quality of life
adults with Type-2 Diabetes (T2DM)
-
Greater improvements
#3
Iyengar yoga
decrease
emotional distress
adults with Type-2 Diabetes (T2DM)
-
Greater improvements
#4
Iyengar yoga
increase
mindfulness
adults with Type-2 Diabetes (T2DM)
-
Increases
#5
standard exercise (SE)
no change
mindfulness
adults with Type-2 Diabetes (T2DM)
-
not seen
#6
Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study:Healthy Active and in Control (HA1C), examined the feasibility and acceptability of yoga as a complementary therapy for adults with Type-2 Diabetes (T2DM). DESIGN: A 2-arm randomized clinical trial comparing Iyengar yoga with a supervised walking program. SETTING: Hospital based gym-type facility and conference rooms. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomized to a 12-week program of either; (1) a twice weekly Iyengar yoga, or (2) a twice-weekly program of standard exercise (SE). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes assessed feasibility and acceptability, including enrollment rates, attendance, study completion, and participant satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included HbA1c, physical activity, and measures of diabetes-related emotional distress, self-care and quality of life (QOL). Assessments were conducted at baseline, end of treatment, 6-months and 9-months post-enrollment. RESULTS: Of 175 adults screened for eligibility, 48 (30 women, 18 men) were eligible and enrolled. The most common reasons for ineligibility were orthopedic restrictions, HbA1c levels <6.5 and BMI > 42. Session attendance was high (82% of sessions attended), as was follow-up completion rates (92%). Program satisfaction rated on a 5-point scale, was high among both Yoga (M = 4.63, SD = 0.57) and SE (M = 4.77, SD = 0.52) participants. Overall 44 adverse events (26 Yoga, 18 SE) were reported. Of these, six were deemed "possibly related" (e.g., neck strain, back pain), and 1 "probably related" (ankle pain after treadmill) to the study. Yoga produced significant reductions in HbA1c. Median HbA1c at 6 months was 1.25 units lower for Yoga compared to SE (95% CI: -2.54 -0.04). Greater improvements in diabetes self-care, quality of life, and emotional distress were seen among Yoga participants than among SE participants. Increases in mindfulness were seen in Yoga but not in SE. CONCLUSIONS: The yoga intervention was highly feasible and acceptable, and produced improvements in blood glucose and psychosocial measures of diabetes management.

Medical Subject Headings (MeSH)
AdultAgedComplementary TherapiesDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2ExerciseFemaleHumansMaleMeditationMiddle AgedMindfulnessPatient SatisfactionQuality of LifeSelf CareWalkingYoga
Study Links
Quality Scores
Safety80
Efficacy85/10
Quality75/10
Citation Metrics
Total Citations18
Citations/Year3.0
Relative Citation Ratio1.32
NIH Percentile60.6%
Research Impact Scores
APT Score0.75
Weight Score2.17
Normalized Score0.81
Related Supplements