Background High-intensity interval training (HIT) as exercise therapy is gradually implemented in cardiac rehabilitation as the cardiovascular benefits from exercise is intensity dependent. However, in previous studies, HIT has been performed with strict supervision. The aim of the study was to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of different modes of HIT in cardiac rehabilitation. Design a randomized clinical study. Methods Ninety participants with coronary artery disease (80 men/10 women, mean age 57 ± 8 years) were randomly assigned to one of three exercise modes: group exercise (GE), treadmill exercise (TE), or home-based exercise (HE). HIT was performed twice a week for 12 weeks with an exercise intensity of 85–95% of peak heart rate. The primary outcome measure was change in peak oxygen uptake (peak VO2). Results Eighty-three participants (92%) completed the intervention without any severe adverse events. Peak VO2 increased from 34.7 ± 7.3 to 39.0 ± 8.0 ml/kg/min, 32.7 ± 6.5 to 36.0 ± 6.2 ml/kg/min, and 34.4 ± 4.8 to 37.2 ± 5.2 ml/kg/min in TE, GE, and HE, respectively. Mean group difference for TE vs. HE was 1.6 ml/kg/min (95% confidence interval, CI, 0.7 to 3.1, p = 0.02), TE vs. GE 1.1 ml/kg/min (95% CI−0.5 to 2.5, p = 0.27), and GE vs. HE 0.6 ml/kg/min (95% CI −1.0 to 2.1, p = 1). However, on-treatment analysis showed no significant difference between groups. Conclusion HIT was efficiently performed in three settings of cardiac rehabilitation, with respect to target exercise intensity, exercise attendance, and increase in peak VO2. Exercise mode was not essential for exercise capacity.

Objectives:To assess the effect of two different physical therapy interventions in patients with stable coronary heart disease and non-cardiac chest pain.Methods:A randomized controlled trial was carried out at a university hospital in Norway. A total of 30 patients with known and stable coronary heart disease and self-reported persistent chest pain reproduced by palpation of intercostal trigger points were participating in the study. The intervention was deep friction massage and heat pack versus heat pack only. The primary outcome was pain intensity after the intervention period and 3 months after the last treatment session, measured by Visual Analogue Scale, 0 to 100. Secondary outcome was health-related quality of life.Results:Treatment with deep friction massage and heat pack gave significant pain reduction compared to heat pack only (–17.6, 95% confidence interval: –30.5, –4.7; p < 0.01), and the reduction was persistent at 3 months’ follow-up (–15.2, 95% confidence interval: –28.5, –1.8; p = 0.03). Health-related quality of life improved in all three domains in patients with no significant difference between groups.Conclusion:Deep friction massage combined with heat pack is an efficient treatment of musculoskeletal chest pain in patients with stable coronary heart disease.