Introduction
Yoga originated in ancient India more than 5000 years ago and is a means of balancing and harmonizing the body, mind, and emotions. The yogic practice embraces moral observances (Yama), self-disciplines (Niyama), physical postures (asana), voluntarily controlled breathing (Pranayama), sensory withdrawal (Pratyahara), concentration (Dharana), meditation (Dhyana), self-realization (Samadhi), and certain philosophical principles [1]. Yoga, as part of Vedic philosophy, emphasizes the unity of mind, body, and soul in the human body [2].
Yoga practice is useful in controlling numerous lifestyle diseases, including type 2 diabetes (T2D). Psycho-neuro-endocrine and immune mechanisms are convoluted in the beneficial effects of yoga on diabetes. Regular yogic practice with proper guidance is beneficial for controlling numerous lifestyle diseases, including type 2 diabetes. The various postures during yoga practice help to improve the sensitivity of ß-cells to glucose, thereby refining insulin secretion, and surging the blood supply to the muscle, thereby promoting glucose uptake [3].
There are several systematic reviews and meta-analyses examining the benefits of yoga for diabetes management, but there is no study directly conducted to observe the effect of yoga on insulin resistance in type 2 diabetes. Hence, the present study aims to systematically evaluate the literature and conduct meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the effectiveness of yoga on insulin resistance in type 2 diabetes.
Materials and Methods
This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines [4].
Search strategies
The data were gathered by searching the online databases Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, Science Direct, MDPI, BioMed Central, and Medline to find appropriate articles using the keywords “type 2 diabetes”, “T2D”, “yoga”, “yoga and type 2 diabetes”, “insulin resistance”, “yoga and insulin resistance”. Proper articles, restricted to human subjects and written in English were included in this study. After obtaining related articles from the above databases, duplicates and some unsatisfactory studies were screened and excluded through the process of identification, screening, and inclusion as followed by the PRISMA guidelines. After the final assessment, appropriate studies were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. Figure 1 illustrates the complete selection process.
Eligibility criteria
Inclusion criteria
The existing studies followed the PICOS criteria [5], including:
- (P) Participants: type 2 diabetes mellitus patients;
- (I) Intervention: Yogic exercise;
- (C) Control: without any regular exercise;
- (O) Outcomes: fasting blood glucose (FBG), postprandial blood glucose (PPBG), glycated hemoglobin (HbAlc), fasting insulin level and homeostatic model assessment for insulin resistance (HOMA-IR);
- (S) Study design: randomized controlled trials (RCT).
Exclusion criteria
- Participants: adolescents with T2D (under 15 years of age) and geriatric age groups (above 75 ye- ars of age); those who had any severe diseases; those who were pregnant; and those who were participating in another regular physical exercise program at the same time;
- Non-randomized controlled trials (NRCT) were excluded;
- Pilot studies, review studies, duplicate studies, only abstracts, conference proceedings, editorials, book chapters and commentaries were excluded.
Data extraction
Data were withdrawn from the included articles [6–11] by the first reviewer (BD) using a structured form on MS Excel and it was cross-checked for precision by the second reviewer (SC). The data were extracted from every study based on six categories: (a) Study Details (first author and publication year), (b) Participants (sample size along with male/female and age), (c) Details of Intervention: (type of yoga: frequency, duration, time and intensity) (d) Details of the Control Group (no exercise with or without standardised care (medication), (e) Outcomes (FBG, PPBG, HbA1c, fasting insulin and HOMA-IR) and (f) Study Design (randomized controlled trials) that is summarized in Table 1, some differences in the extracted data were determined by discussion, with a contribution of the second, third and fourth reviewer (SC, SSD and MD) when necessary.
Risk of bias assessment
The risk of bias in the involved articles was assessed by the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized controlled trials (RoB-2) [12]. Using this tool, the risk of bias in this study was evaluated through the 5 domain. 1) Risk of bias arising from the randomization procedure; 2) Risk of bias due to deviances from the suggested interventions (effect of assignment to intervention and adhering to intervention); 3) Risk of bias caused by missing outcomes; 4) Risk of bias in quantity of the outcomes and 5) Risk of bias in the collection of the stated result. The risk of bias is classified as “Low risk”, “Some concerns” and “High risk”.
Statistical analysis
Numerical results were accumulated from the included studies for the statistical meta-analysis using RevMan statistical software (version 5.4.1). The effect size was measured by taking the difference in mean and standard deviation of FBG, PPBG, fasting insulin and HOMA-IR in the subjects of pre- and post-intervention in both the experimental group and the control group. If the study failed to report this data, the effect size of the mean difference and SD difference was calculated by the following formula [13, 14] Mean difference = = Baseline Mean – Final Mean
Results
Literature search
Literature search was shown according to the searching criterion that is illustrated in Figure 1. There were a total of 228 articles identified through keyword searches from across the seven databases. Every single article was individually screened by title resulting in 92 duplicate records removed and 34 records removed for irrelevant topics and inappropriate studies before screening. After screening the 102 studies 36 studies were excluded for Abstract only. Following this, 32 studies were excluded because they fell into one of the following categories: pilot study, review article, conference proceedings, editorial, book chapter, and commentary. The remaining 28 studies were not eligible for our meta-analysis because they were non-randomized controlled trials, and due to different variables, severe diseases of subjects and experiments conducted on rats.
Study characteristics
After the removal of duplicates, screening of studies and excluding some studies, six studies (randomized controlled trials) were finally included in this systematic review as yoga intervention group with control group that is summarized in Table 1. In total, 375 participants (male — 240 and female — 135) were assigned to yoga with control group and the age range of subjects was 15–75 years.
Sl. No. |
Authors and year |
Participants (recruited, |
Intervention (type, |
Comparison |
Outcomes |
Study design |
Gowri et al., 2022 |
Yoga: M/F 14/21 54 ± 13 years Control: M/F 23/12 |
Yoga 60 min/day, 2 days/week |
Control group with standard medication |
BMI, FBG, PPBG, HbA1c, |
RCT |
|
2 |
Danasegaran et al., 2021 |
Yoga: M/F 40/0 51.95 ± 6.17 years Control: M/F 40/0 |
Yoga 40 min/day, 5 days/week |
Control group with standard medication |
BMI, SBP, DBP, FPG, Insulin, |
RCT |
3 |
Pahlevaninejad,, 2019 |
Yoga: M/F 0/8 47.37 ± 3.62 years Control: M/F 0/8 44.62 ± 3.24 years |
Yoga 75 min/day, 3 days/week |
Control group |
BMI, WHR, FBG, insulin, |
RCT |
4 |
Keerthi et al. 2017 |
Yoga: M/F 31/29 37.28 ± 6.21 years Control: M/F 32/27 36.72 ± 6.12 years |
Yoga 38–45 min/day, 3 days/week for 12 weeks |
Control group |
WHR, FPG, insulin, HOMA-IR, |
RCT |
5 |
Chen et al. 2016 |
Yoga: M/F 0/15 18–25 years Control: M/F 0/15 18–25 years |
Yoga 60 min/day, 2 days/week |
Control group |
Insulin, FPG, HOMA-IR, |
RCT |
6 |
Singh et al. 2008 |
Yoga: M/F 30/0 35–60 years Control: M/F 30/0 35-60 years |
Yoga 45 min/day, 7 days/week |
Control group with standard medication |
BMI, FBG, PPBG, |
RCT |
In this study, yoga intervention involved loosening exercises, breathing exercises, asanas, pranayama, kriya and relaxation techniques also included meditation, prayer and Savasana. Maximum articles used yoga interventions like Tadasana, Trikonasana, Ardha-Matsyendrasana, Pawanmuktasana, Paschimottanasana, Savasana; Anulom-Vilom pranayama, Bhamri pranayama; Kapalbhati kriya; OM mantra. The majority of the studies used 40–60 minutes per day; 2–3 days per week and 8–12 weeks yoga intervention.
Risk of bias analysis
According to the criteria of the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized controlled trials that is illustrated in Table 2, five studies showed ‘low risk of biases, because these five studies were considered to be at low risk of bias for all domains for these outcomes. One study showed ‘some concerns’ as this study was judged to raise some concerns in a minimum of one domain for this result, but not to be at high risk of bias in any domain.
Sl. No |
Author and year |
Domain 1 |
Domain 2 (Assignment to intervention) |
Domain 2 (Adhering |
Domain 3 (Missing outcome data) |
Domain 4 (Measurement of the outcome) |
Domain 5 |
Overall risk |
1 |
Gowri et al., 2022 |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
2 |
Danasegaran et al., 2021 |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
3 |
Pahlevaninejad, 2019 |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
4 |
Keerthi et al., 2017 |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
5 |
Chen et al., 2016 |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
6 |
Singh et al., 2008 |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Some concerns |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Some concerns |
Fasting blood glucose
The effect of fasting blood glucose was considered in six studies (6 interventions, n = 375) [6–11] involved in the meta-analysis. Forest plots for FBG in Figure 2A show that there was a significant decrease in FBG in the yoga group compared to the control group. The collective mean difference for FBG of the yoga group and the control groups from random effects analysis was 33.02 mg/dL (95% CI: –54.91, –11.13) and the statistical heterogeneity as stated by I2 = 97% was statistically significant (p < 0.00001).
Post-prandial blood glucose
There were two studies (2 interventions, n = 130) [6, 11] where the effect of yoga on post-prandial blood glucose (PPBG) was considered. Forest plots for PPBG in Figure 2B showed a significant reduction in PPBG in the yoga group compared to the control group. The pooled mean-difference of PPBG between the yoga group and the control groups of the random effects analysis was 62.54 mg/dL (95% CI: –86.67, –38.42 and the statistical heterogeneity was indicated by I2 = 37%, p = 0.21).
Fasting insulin
Fasting insulin level was assessed in six studies (6 interventions, n = 375) [6–11]. Forest plots for fasting insulin in Figure 2C showed the pooled mean difference in fasting insulin level between the yoga group and the control group of the random effects analysis was 4.95 µIU/mL (95% CI: –7.73, –2.18 and the statistical heterogeneity was indicated by I2 = 97%, p < 0.00001).
Homeostatic Model Assessment for Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR)
HOMA-IR was assessed in six studies included in the meta-analysis (6 interventions, n = 375) [6–11]. Forest plots for HOMA-IR in Figure 2D showed the pooled mean-difference in HOMA-IR between the yoga group and the control groups of the random effects analysis was 2.81 (95% CI: –5.19, -3.93) and the statistical heterogeneity of the data as indicated by I2 = 99% was significant (p < 0.00001).
Discussion
Yoga and insulin resistance in patients with type 2 diabetes were investigated in this meta-analysis. Six studies with 375 adults (male — 240 and female — 135) comparing the yoga intervention to a control group were evaluated. Yoga interventions improved FBG, PPBG, fasting insulin and HOMA-IR compared to the control group. Our results showed a significant reduction in FBG (33.02 mg/dL), PPBG (62.54 mg/dL), fasting insulin (4.95 µIU/mL) and HOMA-IR (2.81) in the yoga intervention compared to the control group (no exercise) in the meta-analysis. Only one study by Gowri et al. [6] evaluated the HbA1c and there was a significant fall in HbA1c level in the yoga group compared to the control group.
Keerthi et al. [9] showed that 12 weeks of yoga given along with standard treatment improved quality of life and reduced diabetes risk scores in patients with diabetes. Gowri et al. [6] showed that the management of combined yoga therapy for individuals with diabetes leads to a significant improvement in glycemic control, insulin resistance, and key biochemical parameters. Yoga helps improve glucose tolerance and insulin sensitivity, anthropometric characteristics, lipid profiles, and blood pressure in diabetes [17]. Some studies showed a reduction in FBG, PPBG, and HbA1c in the control group when comparing the pre- and post-intervention data, which was due to taking of OHA and was not statistically significant [18]. Diabetes is a psychosomatic disease that involves both mind and body, so psycho-neuro-endocrine and immune mechanisms are involved in the beneficial effects of yoga on diabetes [19].
According to the results of this study, the following yoga poses may be recommended: asanas such as Tadasana, Trikonasana, Ardha-Matsyendrasana, Pawanmuktasana, Paschimottanasana, Savasana; Kapalbhati kriya; Anulom-Vilom pranayama and OM mantra meditation for 45–60 minutes per day, five days per week, were more beneficial for type 2 diabetes patients by improving insulin resistance. Asanas, pranayama, kriya, and meditation should be the focus of future studies, with an emphasis on the effects of different intensities of yoga interventions.
Conclusions
In conclusion, this systematic review and meta-analysis delivers a strong indication to conclude whether yoga with oral hypoglycemic agent (OHA) has positive effects on insulin resistance and glycemic control compared to the control group (no regular exercise) with taking OHA in patients with T2D.
Funding
None.
Conflict of interest
None declared.
Acknowledgments
Not applicable.