Cargando…
High-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training within cardiac rehabilitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis
BACKGROUND: Aerobic capacity has been shown to be inversely proportionate to cardiovascular mortality and morbidity and there is growing evidence that high-intensity interval training (HIIT) appears to be more effective than moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) in improving cardiorespirator...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Dove Medical Press
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5790162/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29416382 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OAJSM.S150596 |
_version_ | 1783296410081296384 |
---|---|
author | Hannan, Amanda L Hing, Wayne Simas, Vini Climstein, Mike Coombes, Jeff S Jayasinghe, Rohan Byrnes, Joshua Furness, James |
author_facet | Hannan, Amanda L Hing, Wayne Simas, Vini Climstein, Mike Coombes, Jeff S Jayasinghe, Rohan Byrnes, Joshua Furness, James |
author_sort | Hannan, Amanda L |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Aerobic capacity has been shown to be inversely proportionate to cardiovascular mortality and morbidity and there is growing evidence that high-intensity interval training (HIIT) appears to be more effective than moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) in improving cardiorespiratory fitness within the cardiac population. Previously published systematic reviews in cardiovascular disease have neither investigated the effect that the number of weeks of intervention has on cardiorespiratory fitness changes, nor have adverse events been collated. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to undertake a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) within the cardiac population that investigated cardiorespiratory fitness changes resulting from HIIT versus MICT and to collate adverse events. METHODS: A critical narrative synthesis and meta-analysis was conducted after systematically searching relevant databases up to July 2017. We searched for RCTs that compared cardiorespiratory fitness changes resulting from HIIT versus MICT interventions within the cardiac population. RESULTS: Seventeen studies, involving 953 participants (465 for HIIT and 488 for MICT) were included in the analysis. HIIT was significantly superior to MICT in improving cardiorespiratory fitness overall (SMD 0.34 mL/kg/min; 95% confidence interval [CI; 0.2–0.48]; p<0.00001; I(2)=28%). There were no deaths or cardiac events requiring hospitalization reported in any study during training. Overall, there were more adverse events reported as a result of the MICT (n=14) intervention than the HIIT intervention (n=9). However, some adverse events (n=5) were not classified by intervention group. CONCLUSION: HIIT is superior to MICT in improving cardiorespiratory fitness in participants of cardiac rehabilitation (CR). Improvements in cardiorespiratory fitness are significant for CR programs of >6-week duration. Programs of 7–12 weeks’ duration resulted in the largest improvements in cardiorespiratory fitness for patients with coronary artery disease. HIIT appears to be as safe as MICT for CR participants. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5790162 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Dove Medical Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-57901622018-02-07 High-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training within cardiac rehabilitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis Hannan, Amanda L Hing, Wayne Simas, Vini Climstein, Mike Coombes, Jeff S Jayasinghe, Rohan Byrnes, Joshua Furness, James Open Access J Sports Med Review BACKGROUND: Aerobic capacity has been shown to be inversely proportionate to cardiovascular mortality and morbidity and there is growing evidence that high-intensity interval training (HIIT) appears to be more effective than moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) in improving cardiorespiratory fitness within the cardiac population. Previously published systematic reviews in cardiovascular disease have neither investigated the effect that the number of weeks of intervention has on cardiorespiratory fitness changes, nor have adverse events been collated. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to undertake a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) within the cardiac population that investigated cardiorespiratory fitness changes resulting from HIIT versus MICT and to collate adverse events. METHODS: A critical narrative synthesis and meta-analysis was conducted after systematically searching relevant databases up to July 2017. We searched for RCTs that compared cardiorespiratory fitness changes resulting from HIIT versus MICT interventions within the cardiac population. RESULTS: Seventeen studies, involving 953 participants (465 for HIIT and 488 for MICT) were included in the analysis. HIIT was significantly superior to MICT in improving cardiorespiratory fitness overall (SMD 0.34 mL/kg/min; 95% confidence interval [CI; 0.2–0.48]; p<0.00001; I(2)=28%). There were no deaths or cardiac events requiring hospitalization reported in any study during training. Overall, there were more adverse events reported as a result of the MICT (n=14) intervention than the HIIT intervention (n=9). However, some adverse events (n=5) were not classified by intervention group. CONCLUSION: HIIT is superior to MICT in improving cardiorespiratory fitness in participants of cardiac rehabilitation (CR). Improvements in cardiorespiratory fitness are significant for CR programs of >6-week duration. Programs of 7–12 weeks’ duration resulted in the largest improvements in cardiorespiratory fitness for patients with coronary artery disease. HIIT appears to be as safe as MICT for CR participants. Dove Medical Press 2018-01-26 /pmc/articles/PMC5790162/ /pubmed/29416382 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OAJSM.S150596 Text en © 2018 Hannan et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. |
spellingShingle | Review Hannan, Amanda L Hing, Wayne Simas, Vini Climstein, Mike Coombes, Jeff S Jayasinghe, Rohan Byrnes, Joshua Furness, James High-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training within cardiac rehabilitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title | High-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training within cardiac rehabilitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full | High-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training within cardiac rehabilitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | High-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training within cardiac rehabilitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | High-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training within cardiac rehabilitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_short | High-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training within cardiac rehabilitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort | high-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training within cardiac rehabilitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5790162/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29416382 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OAJSM.S150596 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hannanamandal highintensityintervaltrainingversusmoderateintensitycontinuoustrainingwithincardiacrehabilitationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT hingwayne highintensityintervaltrainingversusmoderateintensitycontinuoustrainingwithincardiacrehabilitationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT simasvini highintensityintervaltrainingversusmoderateintensitycontinuoustrainingwithincardiacrehabilitationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT climsteinmike highintensityintervaltrainingversusmoderateintensitycontinuoustrainingwithincardiacrehabilitationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT coombesjeffs highintensityintervaltrainingversusmoderateintensitycontinuoustrainingwithincardiacrehabilitationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT jayasingherohan highintensityintervaltrainingversusmoderateintensitycontinuoustrainingwithincardiacrehabilitationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT byrnesjoshua highintensityintervaltrainingversusmoderateintensitycontinuoustrainingwithincardiacrehabilitationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT furnessjames highintensityintervaltrainingversusmoderateintensitycontinuoustrainingwithincardiacrehabilitationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |