Skip to main content
. 2023 May 31;2023(5):CD014513. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014513

Plotnikoff 2010.

Study characteristics
Methods Multicomponent, home‐based resistance training for obese adults with type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial
Patient RCT, conducted with patients recruited from diabetes clinics at the University of Alberta Hospital and the local community, intervention was home‐based, Canada
Two arms: 1. Control (control arm) and 2. Resistance‐training group (intervention arm)
Participants Control arm N: 21
Intervention arm N: 27
Diabetes type: type 2
Mean age: NR ± NR
% Male: NR
Longest follow‐up: 4 months
Interventions Control arm:
None
Intervention arm:
1) Case management
2) Promotion of self‐management
Outcomes 1) HbA1c, mean % (SD)
Control arm: pre 6.8 (0.8), post 6.8 (0.8)
Intervention arm: pre 6.9 (1.5), post 7.0 (1.4)
2) SBP, mean mmHg (SD)
Control arm: pre 127.0 (12.6), post 126.7 (10.7)
Intervention arm: pre 125.1 (12.7), post 122.4 (8.6)
3) DBP, mean mmHg (SD)
Control arm: pre 75.0 (8.9), post 75.2 (7.9)
Intervention arm: pre 75.3 (8.1), post 73.9 (7.3)
4) LDL, mean mg/dL (SD)
Control arm: pre 101.3 (30.9), post 98.2 (30.9)
Intervention arm: pre 102.1 (34.8), post 95.9 (34.8)
Funding source RCP was supported by Salary Awards from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (Applied Public Health Chair Program). RJS was supported by a Health Senior Scholar award from the Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research. This study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Strategic Initiative in Excellence, Innovation and Advancement for the Study of Obesity and Healthy Body Weight.
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk Quote: "Computer generated sequence."
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Quote: "Group assignment being placed into opaque, sealed envelopes that were opened by an individual unaware of the study rationale."
Patient's baseline characteristics (selection bias) Low risk Information not available.
Patient's baseline outcomes (selection bias) Low risk Quote: HbA1c (P = 0.831).
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) High risk ~14% lost to follow‐up in control and ~15% in intervention. Reasons seem balanced though.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) and of outcome assessors (detection bias) Low risk Laboratory methods described for all outcomes, and study testers for outcomes were blinded to treatment allocation.
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Matches up with protocol.
Risk of contamination (other bias) High risk Hypothetically, individuals in the control group could have bought their own equipment at home, and also hired a personal trainer.
Other bias Low risk Information not available.