The current review clarifies the cardiometabolic health effects of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) in adults. A systematic search (PubMed) examining HIIT and cardiometabolic health markers was completed on 15 October 2015. Sixty-five intervention studies were included for review and the methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the Downs and Black score. Studies were classified by intervention duration and body mass index classification. Outcomes with at least 5 effect sizes were synthesised using a random-effects meta-analysis of the standardised mean difference (SMD) in cardiometabolic health markers (baseline to postintervention) using Review Manager 5.3. Short-term (ST) HIIT (<12 weeks) significantly improved maximal oxygen uptake (VO 2 max; SMD 0.74, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.12; p<0.001), diastolic blood pressure (DBP; SMD −0.52, 95% CI −0.89 to −0.16; p<0.01) and fasting glucose (SMD −0.35, 95% CI −0.62 to −0.09; p<0.01) in overweight/obese populations. Long-term (LT) HIIT (≥12 weeks) significantly improved waist circumference (SMD −0.20, 95% CI −0.38 to −0.01; p<0.05), % body fat (SMD −0.40, 95% CI −0.74 to −0.06; p<0.05), VO 2 max (SMD 1.20, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.83; p<0.001), resting heart rate (SMD −0.33, 95% CI −0.56 to −0.09; p<0.01), systolic blood pressure (SMD −0.35, 95% CI −0.60 to −0.09; p<0.01) and DBP (SMD −0.38, 95% CI −0.65 to −0.10; p<0.01) in overweight/obese populations. HIIT demonstrated no effect on insulin, lipid profile, C reactive protein or interleukin 6 in overweight/obese populations. In normal weight populations, ST-HIIT and LT-HIIT significantly improved VO 2 max, but no other significant effects were observed. Current evidence suggests that ST-HIIT and LT-HIIT can increase VO 2 max and improve some cardiometabolic risk factors in overweight/obese populations.

The effects of light intensity physical activity (LIPA) on cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors remain to be established. This review summarizes the effects of LIPA on CVD risk factors and CVD-related markers in adults. A systematic search of four electronic databases (PubMed, Academic Search Complete, SPORTDiscus, and CINAHL) examining LIPA and CVD risk factors (body composition, blood pressure, glucose, insulin, glycosylated hemoglobin, and lipid profile) and CVD-related markers (maximal oxygen uptake, heart rate, C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, tumor necrosis factor-alpha, and tumor necrosis factor receptors 1 and 2) published between 1970 and 2015 was performed on 15 March 2015. A total of 33 intervention studies examining the effect of LIPA on CVD risk factors and markers were included in this review. Results indicated that LIPA did not improve CVD risk factors and CVD-related markers in healthy individuals. LIPA was found to improve systolic and diastolic blood pressure in physically inactive populations with a medical condition. Reviewed studies show little support for the role of LIPA to reduce CVD risk factors. Many of the included studies were of low to fair study quality and used low doses of LIPA. Further studies are needed to establish the value of LIPA in reducing CVD risk.

The importance of diet-exercise interaction is extended to the level of intestinal bacteria and gut health.

Physical activity has the potential to reduce cardiometabolic risk factors but evaluation of different intensities of physical activity and the mechanisms behind their health effects still need to be fully established. This study examined the effects of sedentary behaviour, light-intensity training, and high-intensity interval training on biometric indices, glucose and lipid metabolism, inflammatory and oxidative stress markers, and vascular and cardiac function in adult rats. Rats (12 weeks old) were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 groups: control (CTL; no exercise), sedentary (SED; no exercise and housed in small cages to reduce activity), light-intensity trained (LIT; four 30-min exercise bouts/day at 8 m/min separated by 2-h rest period, 5 days/week), and high-intensity interval trained (HIIT, four 2.5-min work bouts/day at 50 m/min separated by 3-min rest periods, 5 days/week). After 12 weeks of intervention, SED had greater visceral fat accumulation (p < 0.01) and slower cardiac conduction (p = 0.04) compared with the CTL group. LIT and HIIT demonstrated beneficial changes in body weight, visceral and epididymal fat weight, glucose regulation, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, total cholesterol, and mesenteric vessel contractile response compared with the CTL group (p < 0.05). LIT had significant improvements in insulin sensitivity and cardiac conduction compared with the CTL and SED groups whilst HIIT had significant improvements in systolic blood pressure and endothelium-independent vasodilation to aorta and mesenteric artery compared with the CTL group (p < 0.05). LIT and HIIT induce health benefits by improving traditional cardiometabolic risk factors. LIT improves cardiac health while HIIT promotes improvements in vascular health.

BackgroundPhysical activity (PA) and diet are 2 lifestyle factors that affect cardiometabolic risk. However, data on how a high-fat high-carbohydrate (HFHC) diet influences the effect of different intensities of PA on cardiometabolic health and cardiovascular function in a controlled setting are yet to be fully established. This study investigated the effect of sedentary behavior, light-intensity training (LIT), and high-intensity interval training (HIIT) on cardiometabolic markers and vascular and cardiac function in HFHC-fed adult rats.MethodsTwelve-week-old Wistar rats were randomly allocated to 4 groups (12 rats/group): control (CTL), sedentary (SED), LIT, and HIIT. Biometric indices, glucose and lipid control, inflammatory and oxidative stress markers, vascular reactivity, and cardiac electrophysiology of the experimental groups were examined after 12 weeks of HFHC-diet feeding and PA interventions.ResultsThe SED group had slower cardiac conduction (p = 0.0426) and greater thoracic aortic contractile responses (p < 0.05) compared with the CTL group. The LIT group showed improved cardiac conduction compared with the SED group (p = 0.0003), and the HIIT group showed decreased mesenteric artery contractile responses compared with all other groups and improved endothelium-dependent mesenteric artery relaxation compared with the LIT group (both p < 0.05). The LIT and HIIT groups had lower visceral (p = 0.0057 for LIT, p = 0.0120 for HIIT) and epididymal fat (p < 0.0001 for LIT, p = 0.0002 for HIIT) compared with the CTL group.ConclusionLIT induced positive adaptations on fat accumulation and cardiac conduction, and HIIT induced a positive effect on fat accumulation, mesenteric artery contraction, and endothelium-dependent relaxation. No other differences were observed between groups. These findings suggest that few positive health effects can be achieved through LIT and HIIT when consuming a chronic and sustained HFHC diet.