Dataset Information

Effects of high intensity interval training on exercise capacity in people with chronic pulmonary conditions: a narrative review.

ABSTRACT: Background:Exercise training is important in the management of adults with chronic pulmonary conditions. However, achieving high intensity exercise may be challenging for this clinical population. There has been clinical interest in applying interval-based training as a strategy to optimise the load that can be tolerated during exercise training. Evidence for such an approach is limited in most chronic pulmonary populations. Main body:In this narrative review, we provide an appraisal of studies investigating whole-body high intensity interval training (HIIT) in adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This is the first review to also include studies investigating HIIT in people with conditions other than COPD. Studies undertaken in adults with a chronic pulmonary condition were reviewed when participants were randomised to receive; (i) HIIT or no exercise or, (ii) HIIT or moderate intensity continuous exercise. Data were extracted on peak rate of oxygen uptake (VO2peak; 'cardiorespiratory fitness') and maximal work rate (Wmax; 'exercise capacity').In people with COPD, two studies demonstrated between-group differences favouring HIIT compared with no exercise. There appears to be no advantage for HIIT compared to continuous exercise on these outcomes. In people with cystic fibrosis (CF), no studies have compared HIIT to no exercise and the two studies that compared HIIT to continuous exercise reported similar benefits. In people prior to resection for non-small cell lung cancer, one study demonstrated a between-group difference in favour of HIIT compared with no exercise on VO2peak. In people with asthma, one study demonstrated a between-group difference in favour of HIIT compared with no exercise on VO2peak and one that compared HIIT to continuous exercise reported similar benefits. No studies were identified non-CF bronchiectasis or interstitial lung diseases. Conclusions:High intensity interval training increases cardiorespiratory fitness and exercise capacity when compared with no exercise and produces a similar magnitude of change as continuous exercise in people with COPD. There is a paucity of studies exploring the effects of HIIT in other chronic pulmonary conditions.

SUBMITTER: Sawyer A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7106755 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effects of high intensity interval training on exercise capacity in people with chronic pulmonary conditions: a narrative review.

Sawyer Abbey A Cavalheri Vinicius V Hill Kylie K

BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation 20200330

<h4>Background</h4>Exercise training is important in the management of adults with chronic pulmonary conditions. However, achieving high intensity exercise may be challenging for this clinical population. There has been clinical interest in applying interval-based training as a strategy to optimise the load that can be tolerated during exercise training. Evidence for such an approach is limited in most chronic pulmonary populations.<h4>Main body</h4>In this narrative review, we provide an apprai ...[more]

PMID: 32257221

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIntensity of exercise is considered a key determinant of training response, however, no systematic review has investigated the effects of different levels of training intensity on exercise capacity, functional exercise capacity and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). As type of training (continuous or interval) may also affect training response, the effects of the type of training in COPD also require investigation.ObjectivesTo determine the effects of training intensity (higher versus lower) or type (continuous versus interval training) on primary outcomes in exercise capacity and secondary outcomes in symptoms and HRQoL for people with COPD.Search methodsWe searched for studies in any language from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, PsycINFO and PubMed. Searches were current as of June 2011.Selection criteriaWe included randomised controlled trials comparing higher training intensity to lower training intensity or comparing continuous training to interval training in people with COPD. We excluded studies that compared exercise training with no exercise training.Data collection and analysisWe pooled results of comparable groups of studies and calculated the treatment effect and 95% confidence intervals (CI) using a random-effects model. We made two separate comparisons of effects between: 1) higher and lower training intensity; 2) continuous and interval training. We contacted authors of missing data.Main resultsWe analysed three included studies (231 participants) for comparisons between higher and lower-intensity training and eight included studies (367 participants) for comparisons between continuous and interval training. Primary outcomes were outcomes at peak exercise (peak work rate, peak oxygen consumption, peak minute ventilation and lactate threshold), at isowork or isotime, endurance time on a constant work rate test and functional exercise capacity (six-minute walk distance). When comparing higher versus lower-intensity training, the pooled primary outcomes were endurance time and six-minute walk distance. There were no significant differences in endurance time improvement (mean difference (MD) 1.07 minutes; 95% CI -1.53 to 3.67) and six-minute walk distance improvement (MD 2.8 metres; 95% CI -10.1 to 15.6) following higher or lower-intensity training. However, heterogeneity of the endurance time results between studies was significant. When comparing continuous and interval training, there were no significant differences in any of the primary outcomes, except for oxygen consumption at isotime (MD 0.08; 95% CI 0.01 to 0.16) but the treatment effect was not considered clinically important. According to the GRADE system, studies were of low to moderate quality.Authors' conclusionsComparisons between the higher and lower training intensity were limited due to the small number of included studies and participants. Consequently, there are insufficient data to draw any conclusions on exercise capacity, symptoms and HRQoL for this comparison. For comparisons between continuous and interval training, both appear to be equally effective in improving exercise capacity, symptoms and HRQoL.

Project description:Poststroke guidelines recommend moderate-intensity, continuous aerobic training (MCT) to improve aerobic capacity and mobility after stroke. High-intensity interval training (HIT) has been shown to be more effective than MCT among healthy adults and people with heart disease. However, HIT and MCT have not been compared previously among people with stroke.The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility and justification for a definitive randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing HIT and MCT in people with chronic stroke.A preliminary RCT was conducted.The study was conducted in a cardiovascular stress laboratory and a rehabilitation research laboratory.Ambulatory people at least 6 months poststroke participated.Both groups trained 25 minutes, 3 times per week, for 4 weeks. The HIT strategy involved 30-second bursts at maximum-tolerated treadmill speed alternated with 30- to 60-second rest periods. The MCT strategy involved continuous treadmill walking at 45% to 50% of heart rate reserve.Measurements included recruitment and attendance statistics, qualitative HIT acceptability, adverse events, and the following blinded outcome variables: peak oxygen uptake, ventilatory threshold, metabolic cost of gait, fractional utilization, fastest treadmill speed, 10-Meter Walk Test, and Six-Minute Walk Test.During the 8-month recruitment period, 26 participants consented to participate. Eighteen participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to either the HIT group (n=13) or the MCT group (n=5). Eleven out of the 13 HIT group participants attended all sessions. Participants reported that HIT was acceptable and no serious adverse events occurred. Standardized effect size estimates between groups were moderate to very large for most outcome measures. Only 30% of treadmill speed gains in the HIT group translated into overground gait speed improvement.The study was not designed to definitively test safety or efficacy.Although further protocol optimization is needed to improve overground translation of treadmill gains, a definitive RCT comparing HIT and MCT appears to be feasible and warranted.

Project description:To date, there are several knowledge gaps on how to properly prescribe concurrent training to achieve the best dose-response, especially regarding the optimal intensity or volume of the aerobic component. Thus, the objective of this study is to analyze the effects of different aerobic exercise modes and intensities [i.e. aerobic high-intensity interval training (HIIT) versus moderate-intensity continuous aerobic training (MICT) combined with a resistance training (RT) program] on metabolic outcomes in participants with metabolic syndrome (MetS). Thirty-nine men and women (67.0 ± 6.7 years) volunteered to a 12-weeks exercise intervention (3 week-1, 50 min/session) and were randomly assigned to one of three groups: (a) RT plus MICT (RT+MICT) (2 males; 11 females); (b) RT plus HIIT (RT+HIIT) (4 males; 9 females); and (c) control group (CON) - without formal exercise (4 males; 9 females). Intensity was established between 60 and 70% of maximum heart rate (HRmax) in RT+MICT and ranged from 55-65% to 80-90% HRmax in the RT+HIIT group. Dependent outcomes included morphological, metabolic and hemodynamic variables. Both training groups improved waist circumference (RT+MICT: P = 0.019; RT+HIIT: P = 0.003), but not body weight, fat mass or fat-free mass (P ? 0.114). RT+HIIT group improved fasting glucose (P = 0.014), low density lipoprotein [LDL (P = 0.022)], insulin (P = 0.034) and homeostatic model assessment (P = 0.028). RT+MICT group reduced triglycerides (P = 0.053). Both exercise interventions did not change high sensitivity C-reactive protein, glycated hemoglobin, high density lipoprotein and total cholesterol, systolic, diastolic or mean arterial blood pressure (P ? 0.05). The CON group reduced the LDL (P = 0.031). This trial suggests that short-term exercise mode and intensity may differently impact the metabolic profile of individuals with MetS. Further, our data suggests that both concurrent trainings promote important cardiometabolic gains, particularly in the RT+HIIT. Nonetheless, due to the small-to-moderate effect size and the short-term intervention length, our data suggests that the intervention length also has an important modulating role in these benefits in older adults with MetS. Therefore, more research is needed to confirm our results using longer exercise interventions and larger groups.

Dataset Information

Effects of high intensity interval training on exercise capacity in people with chronic pulmonary conditions: a narrative review.

Publications

Effects of high intensity interval training on exercise capacity in people with chronic pulmonary conditions: a narrative review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets