Background The benefits of aerobic exercise are well-studied; there is no consensus on the association between resistance training and major adverse cardiovascular outcomes. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to address this issue. Design and methods We searched for randomized trials and cohort studies that evaluated the association between resistance training and mortality and cardiovascular events. Two investigators screened the identified abstracts and full-texts independently and in duplicate. Cochrane tools were used to assess the risk of bias. We calculated hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals using random effect models. Results From the 1430 studies identified, 11 (one randomized trial and 10 cohort studies) met the inclusion criteria, totaling 370,256 participants with mean follow-up of 8.85 years. The meta-analysis showed that, compared with no exercise, resistance training was associated with 21% (hazard ratio (95% confidence interval (CI)), 0.79 (0.69–0.91)) and 40% (hazard ratio (95% CI), 0.60 (0.49–0.72)) lower all-cause mortality alone and when combined with aerobic exercise, respectively. Furthermore, resistance training had a borderline association with lower cardiovascular mortality (hazard ratio (95% CI), 0.83 (0.67–1.03)). In addition, resistance training showed no significant association with cancer mortality. Risk of bias was low to intermediate in the included studies. One cohort study looked at the effect of resistance training on coronary heart disease events in men and found a 23% risk reduction (risk ratio, 0.77, CI: 0.61–0.98). Conclusion Resistance training is associated with lower mortality and appears to have an additive effect when combined with aerobic exercise. There are insufficient data to determine the potential beneficial effect of resistance training on non-fatal events or the effect of substituting aerobic exercise with resistance training.
Exercise based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is recognized internationally as a class 1 clinical practice recommendation for patients with select cardiovascular diseases and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Over the past decade, several meta-analyses have generated debate regarding the effectiveness of exercise-based CR for reducing all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. A common theme highlighted in these meta-analyses is the heterogeneity and/or lack of detail regarding exercise prescription methodology within CR programs. Currently there is no international consensus on exercise prescription for CR, and exercise intensity recommendations vary considerably between countries from light-moderate intensity to moderate intensity to moderate-vigorous intensity. As cardiorespiratory fitness [peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak)] is a strong predictor of mortality in patients with coronary heart disease and heart failure, exercise prescription that optimizes improvement in cardiorespiratory fitness and exercise capacity is a critical consideration for the efficacy of CR programming. This review will examine the evidence for prescribing higher-intensity aerobic exercise in CR, including the role of high-intensity interval training. This discussion will highlight the beneficial physiological adaptations to pulmonary, cardiac, vascular, and skeletal muscle systems associated with moderate-vigorous exercise training in patients with coronary heart disease and heart failure. Moreover, this review will propose how varying interval exercise protocols (such as short-duration or long-duration interval training) and exercise progression models may influence central and peripheral physiological adaptations. Importantly, a key focus of this review is to provide clinically-relevant recommendations and strategies to optimize prescription of exercise intensity while maximizing safety in patients attending CR programs.
Background To examine the effect of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) on metabolic syndrome (MetS) and body composition in cardiac rehabilitation (CR) patients with myocardial infarction (MI). Methods We retrospectively screened 174 consecutive patients with MetS enrolled in CR following MI between 2015 and 2018. We included 56 patients who completed 36 CR sessions and pre-post dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Of these patients, 42 engaged in HIIT and 14 in moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT). HIIT included 4–8 intervals of high-intensity (30–60 s at RPE 15–17 [Borg 6–20]) and low-intensity (1–5 min at RPE < 14), and MICT included 20–45 min of exercise at RPE 12–14. MetS and body composition variables were compared between MICT and HIIT groups. Results Compared to MICT, HIIT demonstrated greater reductions in MetS (relative risk = 0.5, 95% CI 0.33–0.75, P < .001), MetS z-score (− 3.6 ± 2.9 vs. − 0.8 ± 3.8, P < .001) and improved MetS components: waist circumference (− 3 ± 5 vs. 1 ± 5 cm, P = .01), fasting blood glucose (− 25.8 ± 34.8 vs. − 3.9 ± 25.8 mg/dl, P < .001), triglycerides (− 67.8 ± 86.7 vs. − 10.4 ± 105.3 mg/dl, P < .001), and diastolic blood pressure (− 7 ± 11 vs. 0 ± 13 mmHg, P = .001). HIIT group demonstrated greater reductions in body fat mass (− 2.1 ± 2.1 vs. 0 ± 2.2 kg, P = .002), with increased body lean mass (0.9 ± 1.9 vs. − 0.9 ± 3.2 kg, P = .01) than the MICT. After matching for exercise energy expenditure, HIIT-induced improvements persisted for MetS z-score ( P < .001), MetS components ( P < .05), body fat mass ( P = .002), body fat ( P = .01), and lean mass ( P = .03). Conclusions Our data suggest that, compared to MICT, supervised HIIT results in greater improvements in MetS and body composition in MI patients with MetS undergoing CR.
Background There is wide variability in cardiac rehabilitation (CR) dose (ie, number of sessions) delivered, and no evidence‐based recommendations regarding what dose to prescribe. We aimed to test what CR dose impacts major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs). Methods and Results This is an historical cohort study of all patients who had coronary artery disease and who initiated supervised CR between 2002 and 2012 from a single major CR center. CR dose was defined as number of visits including exercise and patient education. Follow‐up was performed using record linkage from the Rochester Epidemiology Project. MACEs included acute myocardial infarction, unstable angina, ventricular arrhythmias, stroke, revascularization, or all‐cause mortality. Dose was analyzed in several ways, including tertiles, categories, and as a continuous variable. Cox models were adjusted for factors associated with dose and MACE. The cohort consisted of 2345 patients, who attended a mean of 12.5±11.1 of 36 prescribed sessions. After a mean follow‐up of 6 years, 695 (29.65%) patients had a MACE, including 231 who died. CR dose was inversely associated with MACE (hazard ratio, 0.66 [95% CI]; 0.55–0.91) in those completing ≥20 sessions, when compared with those not exposed to formal exercise sessions (≤1 session; log‐rank P =0.007). We did not find evidence of nonlinearity ( P ≥0.050), suggesting no minimal threshold nor ceiling. Each additional session was associated with a lower rate of MACE (fully adjusted hazard ratio, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.97–0.99]). Greater session frequency was also associated with lower MACE risk (fully adjusted hazard ratio, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.58–0.94]). Conclusions CR reduces MACEs, but the benefit appears to be linear, with greater risk reduction with higher doses, and no upper threshold.
Cardiovascular disease is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in males and females in the United States and globally. Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is recommended by the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology for secondary prevention for patients with cardiovascular disease. CR participation is associated with improved cardiovascular disease risk factor management, quality of life, and exercise capacity as well as reductions in hospital admissions and mortality. Despite these advantageous clinical outcomes, significant sex disparities exist in outpatient phase II CR programming. This article reviews sex differences that are present in the spectrum of care provided by outpatient phase II CR programming (ie, from referral to clinical management). We first review CR participation by detailing the sex disparities in the rates of CR referral, enrollment, and completion. In doing so, we discuss patient, health care provider, and social/environmental level barriers to CR participation with a particular emphasis on those barriers that majorly impact females. We also evaluate sex differences in the core components incorporated into CR programming (eg, patient assessment, exercise training, hypertension management). Next, we review strategies to mitigate these sex differences in CR participation with a focus on automatic CR referral, female-only CR programming, and hybrid CR. Finally, we outline knowledge gaps and areas of future research to minimize and prevent sex differences in CR programming.
Purpose: High-intensity interval training (HIIT) is gaining popularity as a training approach for patients attending cardiac rehabilitation (CR). While the literature has focused on the efficacy of HIIT for improving cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF), particularly when compared with moderate intensity exercise, less emphasis has been placed on adherence to HIIT. The aim of this review was to summarize the current literature regarding adherence to HIIT in CR patients with coronary artery disease. Review Methods: A review identified 36 studies investigating HIIT in CR patients with coronary artery disease. Methods and data were extracted for exercise or training adherence (to attendance, intensity, and duration), feasibility of protocols, and CRF. The review summarizes reporting of adherence; adherence to HIIT and comparator/s; the influence of adherence on changes in CRF; and feasibility of HIIT. Summary: Adherence to the attendance of HIIT sessions was high and comparable with moderate-intensity exercise. However, adherence to the intensity and duration of HIIT was variable and underreported, which has implications for determining the treatment effect of the exercise interventions being compared. Furthermore, additional research is needed to investigate the utility of home-based HIIT and long-term adherence to HIIT following supervised programs. This review provides recommendations for researchers in the measurement and reporting of adherence to HIIT and other exercise interventions to facilitate a sufficient and consistent approach for future studies. This article also highlights strategies for clinicians to improve adherence, feasibility, and enjoyment of HIIT for their patients.
Research indicates that exercise is an efficacious intervention for depression among adults; however, little is known regarding its efficacy for preventing postpartum depression. The Healthy Mom study was a randomized controlled trial examining the efficacy of an exercise intervention for the prevention of postpartum depression. Specifically, postpartum women with a history of depression or a maternal family history of depression (n=130) were randomly assigned to a telephone-based exercise intervention or a wellness/support contact control condition each lasting six months. The exercise intervention was designed to motivate postpartum women to exercise based on Social Cognitive Theory and the Transtheoretical Model. The primary dependent variable was depression based on the Structured Clinical Diagnostic Interview (SCID). Secondary dependent variables included scores on the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale, the PHQ-9, and the Perceived Stress Scale. The purpose of this paper is to describe the study design, methodology, and baseline data for this trial. Upon completion of the trial, the results will yield important information about the efficacy of exercise in preventing postpartum depression.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.