HEALTH – CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE – EXERCISE – ENDURANCE


3 ARTICLES 


HIGH vs. MODERATE RUNNING EFFECTS ON CARDIOMETABOLIC RISK FACTORS IN UNTRAINED MALES – 2015


Kemmler W et al; Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2015
AIM
Determine the effect of high-intensity (interval) training (HI[I]T) vs. moderate-intensity continuous exercise (MICE)
16-weeks
METHODS
(1) 81 healthy untrained middle aged men
(2) HI(I)T consisted of running exercise around or above the individual anaerobic threshold (≈ 80- 100 % HRmax)
(3) MICE focused on continuous running exercise at ≈ 65-77.5 % HRmax
(4) Both protocols were comparable with respect to energy consumption
(5) Study endpoints were cardiorespiratory fitness (VO2max), left ventricular mass index (LVMI), metabolic syndrome Z-score (MetS-Z-score), intima-media-thickness (IMT) and body composition
RESULTS
(1) VO2max-changes in this overweighed male cohort significantly differ between HIIT (14.7 ± 9.3 %) and MICE (7.9 ± 7.4 %)
(2) LVMI significantly increased in both groups; However the change was significantly more pronounced in the HIIT-group
(3) MetS-Z-score and IMT did not show significant group-differences
(4) However, reductions of fat mass were significantly higher among the MICE-participants
(5) The same was true for lean body mass
CONCLUSION
– High-intensity interval training tends to impact cardiometabolic health more favorably


EFFECT OF HIGH-INTENSITY vs. MODERATE TRAINING ON PEAK OXYGEN UPTAKE IN HEART TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS – 2014


C. H. Dall1,2,*, E. Prescott et al; American Journal of Transplantation; 2014
INTRODUCTION
:
– In heart transplant (HTx) recipients, there has been reluctance to recommend high-intensity interval training (HIIT) due to denervation and chronotropic impairment of the heart
METHOD:
– Compared effects of 12 wks HIIT vs. continued moderate exercise (CON) on exercise capacity and chronotropic response in stable HTx recipients >12 months after transplantation
– The study was completed by 16 HTx recipients (mean age 52 years, 75% males)
The high-intensity interval training sessions consisted of:
(1) 10 min warm-up
(2) 16 min total upright bicycle interval training with intervals of 4, 2 and 1 min duration at >80% of peak oxygen uptake
(2) Each interval was separated by a 2 min active rest period at approximately 60% of peak oxygen uptake
(3) 10-min cool-down.
The continued moderate exercise training sessions consisted of:
(1) 10 min warm-up
(2) 45 min upright bicycle training at 60-70% of peak oxygen uptake
(3) 10 min cool-down.
RESULTS:
(1) Baseline peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak) was 22.9 mL/kg/min
(2) HIIT increased VO2peak by 4.9 ± 2.7 mL/min/kg (17%)
(3) CON increased VO2peak by 2.6 ± 2.2 mL/kg/min (10%) (significantly higher in HIIT)
(4) During HIIT, systolic blood pressure decreased significantly with no significant change in CON
(5) Peak heart rate (HRpeak) increased significantly by 4.3 beats per minute after HIIT with no significant change in CON
(6) Heart rate recovery (HRrecovery) improved in both groups with a trend toward greater improvement after HIIT
CONCLUSION:
(1) HIIT was well tolerated, had a superior effect on O2 uptake, and led to an unexpected increase in HRpeak and faster HRrecovery
(2) This indicates that the benefits of HIIT are partly a result of improved chronotropic response


HIGH-INTENSITY INTERVAL TRAINING IN PATIENTS WITH LIFESTYLE-INDUCED CARDIOMETABOLIC DISEASE – 2014


Kassia S Weston, Ulrik Wisløff, Jeff S Coombes 2014
BACKGROUND/AIM
– Cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) is a strong determinant of morbidity and mortality
– In athletes and the general population, it is established that high-intensity interval training (HIIT) is superior to moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) in improving CRF
– This is a meta-analysis to quantify the efficacy and safety of HIIT compared to MICT in individuals with chronic cardiometabolic lifestyle diseases
METHODS
– The included studies were required to have a population sample of chronic disease, where poor lifestyle is considered as a main contributor to the disease
– The procedural quality of the studies was assessed by use of a modified Physiotherapy Evidence Base Database (PEDro) scale
– A meta-analysis compared the mean difference (MD) of preintervention versus postintervention CRF (VO2peak) between HIIT and MICT
RESULTS
– 10 studies with 273 patients were included in the meta-analysis
– Participants had coronary artery disease, heart failure, hypertension, metabolic syndrome and obesity
– Significantly higher increase in VO2peak after HIIT compared to MICT, equivalent to 9.1%
CONCLUSIONS
– HIIT significantly increases CRF by almost double that of MICT in patients with lifestyle-induced chronic diseases


Comments are closed.