Premium
Exercise training and reproductive outcomes in women with polycystic ovary syndrome: A pilot randomized controlled trial
Author(s) -
Benham Jamie L.,
Booth Jane E.,
Corenblum Bernard,
Doucette Steve,
Friedenreich Christine M.,
Rabi Doreen M.,
Sigal Ronald J.
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
clinical endocrinology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.055
H-Index - 147
eISSN - 1365-2265
pISSN - 0300-0664
DOI - 10.1111/cen.14452
Subject(s) - medicine , interval training , polycystic ovary , body mass index , anthropometry , high intensity interval training , randomized controlled trial , aerobic exercise , waist , physical therapy , endocrinology , obesity , insulin resistance
Abstract Objective Exercise is recommended for polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), but the most effective exercise prescription is unclear. This trial compared effects of high‐intensity interval training (HIIT), continuous aerobic exercise training (CAET) and no‐exercise control on reproductive, anthropometric and cardiometabolic outcomes in PCOS. Design Pilot randomized controlled trial. Participants Previously inactive women aged 18–40 years with PCOS. Measurements Feasibility outcomes included recruitment, retention, adherence to exercise and daily ovulation prediction kit (OPK) testing. Preliminary efficacy outcomes included reproductive, anthropometric and cardiometabolic health markers. Results Forty‐seven women were randomized to no‐exercise control ( n = 17), HIIT ( n = 16), or CAET ( n = 14). Forty (85%) participants completed the trial. Median exercise adherence was 68% (IQR 53%, 86%). Median daily OPK‐testing adherence in the first half of the intervention was 87% (IQR 61%, 97%) compared with 65% (IQR 0%, 96%) in the second half. Body mass index decreased significantly in CAET compared with control (−1.0 kg/m 2 , p = .01) and HIIT (−0.9 kg/m 2 , p = .04). Mean waist circumference decreased in all groups (−7.3 cm, −6.9 cm, −4.5 cm in HIIT, CAET and control) with no significant between‐group differences. Mean LDL‐C was significantly reduced for HIIT compared to CAET (−0.33 mmol/L, p = .03). HDL‐C increased in HIIT compared with control (0.18 mmol/L, p = .04). Conclusions There were feasibility challenges with adherence to daily ovulation assessment limiting the ability to analyse the effect of the exercise interventions on ovulation. CAET and HIIT were both effective at improving anthropometrics and some cardiometabolic health markers. Further studies need to determine optimal and acceptable exercise prescriptions for this population.