Dataset Information

High-intensity interval training in the prehabilitation of cancer patients-a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

To evaluate the impact of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) on health-related outcome parameters in the prehabilitation of patients diagnosed with cancer.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies on HIIT in cancer prehabilitation conducted by screening standard databases from their inception to March 30, 2020. Outcomes of interest included cardiorespiratory fitness, feasibility, safety, clinical, and patient-reported outcomes.

Results

Of the 855 identified studies, 8 articles met the inclusion criteria (7 randomized, 1 non-randomized controlled trial) with a total of 896 patients. The study protocols were heterogeneous, but the methodological quality ranged from good to high according to PEDro scale. Meta-analysis revealed a significant improvement of peak oxygen consumption (VO₂peak) achieved with HIIT compared to usual care. Furthermore, HIIT was feasible and safe, showing low risk of adverse events and positive effects on health-related outcomes in prehabilitative settings.

Conclusion

In the phase of prehabilitation, HIIT has potential health benefits in patients diagnosed with cancer and is feasible and safe to perform. Nonetheless, larger randomized controlled trials focusing on long-term effects (such as cancer recurrence or survival rates) are missing, to underline the potential relevance of HIIT for cancer patients.

SUBMITTER: Palma S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7892520 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

High-intensity interval training in the prehabilitation of cancer patients-a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Palma Stefano S Hasenoehrl Timothy T Jordakieva Galateja G Ramazanova Dariga D Crevenna Richard R

Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer 20201026 4

<h4>Purpose</h4>To evaluate the impact of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) on health-related outcome parameters in the prehabilitation of patients diagnosed with cancer.<h4>Methods</h4>A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies on HIIT in cancer prehabilitation conducted by screening standard databases from their inception to March 30, 2020. Outcomes of interest included cardiorespiratory fitness, feasibility, safety, clinical, and patient-reported outcomes.<h4>Results</ ...[more]

PMID: 33106975

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTo determine rates of compliance (i.e., supervised intervention attendance) and adherence (i.e., unsupervised physical activity completion) to high-intensity interval training (HIIT) among insufficiently active adults and adults with a medical condition, and determine whether compliance and adherence rates were different between HIIT and moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT).MethodsArticles on adults in a HIIT intervention and who were either insufficiently active or had a medical condition were included. MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, and Web of Science were searched. Article screening and data extraction were completed by two independent reviewers. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2.0 or ROBINS-I. Meta-analyses were conducted to discern differences in compliance and adherence between HIIT vs. MICT. Sensitivity analyses, publication bias, sub-group analyses, and quality appraisal were conducted for each meta-analysis.ResultsOne hundred eighty-eight unique studies were included (n = 8928 participants). Compliance to HIIT interventions averaged 89.4% (SD:11.8%), while adherence to HIIT averaged 63% (SD: 21.1%). Compliance and adherence to MICT averaged 92.5% (SD:10.6%) and 68.2% (SD:16.2%), respectively. Based on 65 studies included in the meta-analysis, compliance rates were not different between supervised HIIT and MICT interventions [Hedge's g = 0.015 (95%CI: - 0.088-0.118), p = .78]. Results were robust and low risk of publication bias was detected. No differences were detected based on sub-group analyses comparing medical conditions or risk of bias of studies. Quality of the evidence was rated as moderate over concerns in the directness of the evidence. Based on 10 studies, adherence rates were not different between unsupervised HIIT and MICT interventions [Hedge's g = - 0.313 (95%CI: - 0.681-0.056), p = .096]. Sub-group analysis points to differences in adherence rates dependent on the method of outcome measurement. Adherence results should be interpreted with caution due to very low quality of evidence.ConclusionsCompliance to HIIT and MICT was high among insufficiently active adults and adults with a medical condition. Adherence to HIIT and MICT was relatively moderate, although there was high heterogeneity and very low quality of evidence. Further research should take into consideration exercise protocols employed, methods of outcome measurement, and measurement timepoints.RegistrationThis review was registered in the PROSPERO database and given the identifier CRD42019103313.

Project description:Dietary nitrate supplementation has shown promising ergogenic effects on endurance exercise. However, at present there is no systematic analysis evaluating the effects of acute or chronic nitrate supplementation on performance measures during high-intensity interval training (HIIT) and sprint interval training (SIT). The main aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the evidence for supplementation of dietary beetroot-a common source of nitrate-to improve peak and mean power output during HIIT and SIT. A systematic literature search was carried out following PRISMA guidelines and the PICOS framework within the following databases: PubMed, ProQuest, ScienceDirect, and SPORTDiscus. Search terms used were: ((nitrate OR nitrite OR beetroot) AND (HIIT or high intensity or sprint interval or SIT) AND (performance)). A total of 17 studies were included and reviewed independently. Seven studies applied an acute supplementation strategy and ten studies applied chronic supplementation. The standardised mean difference for mean power output showed an overall trivial, non-significant effect in favour of placebo (Hedges' g = -0.05, 95% CI -0.32 to 0.21, Z = 0.39, p = 0.69). The standardised mean difference for peak power output showed a trivial, non-significant effect in favour of the beetroot juice intervention (Hedges' g = 0.08, 95% CI -0.14 to 0.30, Z = 0.72, p = 0.47). The present meta-analysis showed trivial statistical heterogeneity in power output, but the variation in the exercise protocols, nitrate dosage, type of beetroot products, supplementation strategy, and duration among studies restricted a firm conclusion of the effect of beetroot supplementation on HIIT performance. Our findings suggest that beetroot supplementation offers no significant improvement to peak or mean power output during HIIT or SIT. Future research could further examine the ergogenic potential by optimising the beetroot supplementation strategy in terms of dosage, timing, and type of beetroot product. The potential combined effect of other ingredients in the beetroot products should not be undermined. Finally, a chronic supplementation protocol with a higher beetroot dosage (>12.9 mmol/day for 6 days) is recommended for future HIIT and SIT study.

Project description:IntroductionHigh-intensity interval training (HIIT) is an appropriate training modality to improve endurance and therefore contributes to physical performance. This review investigates the effect of HIIT on functional performance in cancer patients. We reviewed the relative peak oxygen uptake (relV̇O2PEAK) and meta-analytical compared HIIT with moderate intensity continuous training (MICT). Furthermore, we took various training parameters under consideration.MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted in Scopus, PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases. For the review, we included randomized controlled trials containing HIIT with cancer patients. From this, we filtered interventions with additional MICT for the meta-analysis. Outcomes of interest were various functional performance assessments and V̇O2MAX.ResultsThe research yielded 584 records which fit the inclusion criteria, of which 31 studies with n=1555 patients (57.4±8.6 years) could be included in the overall review and 8 studies in the meta-analysis (n=268, 59.11±5.11 years) regarding relV̇O2PEAK. Different functional outcomes were found, of which walking distance (+8.63±6.91% meters in 6-min walk test) and mobility (+2.7cm in sit and reach test) improved significantly due to HIIT. In terms of relV̇O2PEAK, the performance of cancer patients was improved by HIIT (10.68±6.48%) and MICT (7.4±4.29%). HIIT can be favored to increase relV̇O2PEAK (SMD 0.37; 95% CI 0.09-0.65; I2=0%; p=0.009). Effect sizes for relV̇O2PEAK improvements correlate moderately with total training volume (Spearman's ρ=0.49; p=0.03), whereas percentage increases do not (Spearman's ρ=0.24; p=0.14).ConclusionFunctional and physical outcomes were positively altered by different HIIT protocols and forms of implementation, whereas a tendency toward more effectiveness of HIIT vs. MICT was found for relV̇O2PEAK. Future studies should include functional parameters more often, to finally allow a comparison between both training protocols in this regard.

Project description:Background: Exercise training improves endothelial function in patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD). However, the influence of training variables remains unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of high-intensity interval training (HIIT), compared to moderate intensity training (MIT) and other exercise modalities (i.e., resistance and combined exercise), on endothelial function, assessed by arterial flow-mediated dilation (FMD) or endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs), in patients with CVD. Secondly, we investigated the influence of other training variables (i.e., HIIT protocol). Methods: The PICOS strategy was used to identify randomised and non-randomised studies comparing the effect of HIIT and other exercise modalities (e.g., MIT) on endothelial function in patients with CVD. Electronic searches were carried out in Pubmed, Embase, and Web of Science up to November 2022. The TESTEX scale was used to evaluate the methodological quality of the included studies. Random-effects models of between-group mean difference (MD) were estimated. A positive MD indicated an effect in favour of HIIT. Heterogeneity analyses were performed by the chi-square test and I 2 index. Subgroup analyses evaluated the influence of potential moderator variables. Results: Fourteen studies (13; 92.9% randomised) were included. Most of the studies trained 3 days a week for 12 weeks and performed long HIIT. No statistically significant differences were found between HIIT and MIT for improving brachial FMD in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) (8 studies; MD+ = 0.91% [95% confidence interval (CI) = -0.06, 1.88]). However, subgroup analyses showed that long HIIT (i.e., > 1 min) is better than MIT for enhancing FMD (5 studies; MD+ = 1.46% [95% CI = 0.35, 2.57]), while no differences were found between short HIIT (i.e., ≤ 1 min) and MIT (3 studies; MD+ = -0.41% [95% CI = -1.64, 0.82]). Insufficient data prevented pooled analysis for EPCs, and individual studies failed to find statistically significant differences (p > .050) between HIIT and other exercise modalities in increasing EPCs. Discussion: Poor methodological quality could limit the precision of the current results and increase the inconsistency. Long HIIT is superior to MIT for improving FMD in patients with CAD or HFrEF. Future studies comparing HIIT to other exercise modalities, as well as the effect on EPCs and in HF with preserved ejection fraction are required. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#myprospero, identifier CRD42022358156.

Dataset Information

High-intensity interval training in the prehabilitation of cancer patients-a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

High-intensity interval training in the prehabilitation of cancer patients-a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets