Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Exercise training is an established adjuvant therapy in heart failure; however, the effects of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) in HFpEF are unknown. We compared the effects of HIIT vs. moderate-intensity aerobic continuous training (MI-ACT) on peak oxygen uptake (V̇o₂peak), left ventricular diastolic dysfunction, and endothelial function in patients with HFpEF. Nineteen patients with HFpEF (age 70 ± 8.3 yr) were randomized to either HIIT (4 × 4 min at 85-90% peak heart rate, with 3 min active recovery) or MI-ACT (30 min at 70% peak heart rate). Fifteen patients completed exercise training (HIIT: n = 9; MI-ACT: n = 6). Patients trained 3 days/wk for 4 wk. Before and after training patients underwent a treadmill test for V̇o₂peak determination, 2D-echocardiography for assessment of left ventricular diastolic dysfunction, and brachial artery flow-mediated dilation (FMD) for assessment of endothelial function. HIIT improved V̇o₂peak (pre = 19.2 ± 5.2 ml·kg(-1)·min(-1); post = 21.0 ± 5.2 ml·kg(-1)·min(-1); P = 0.04) and left ventricular diastolic dysfunction grade (pre = 2.1 ± 0.3; post = 1.3 ± 0.7; P = 0.02), but FMD was unchanged (pre = 6.9 ± 3.7%; post = 7.0 ± 4.2%). No changes were observed following MI-ACT. A trend for reduced left atrial volume index was observed following HIIT compared with MI-ACT (-3.3 ± 6.6 vs. +5.8 ± 10.7 ml/m(2); P = 0.06). In HFpEF patients 4 wk of HIIT significantly improved V̇o₂peak and left ventricular diastolic dysfunction. HIIT may provide a more robust stimulus than MI-ACT for early exercise training adaptations in HFpEF.

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has increased unemployment and food insecurity in the United States (US). Prior to the pandemic, college students exhibited higher rates of food insecurity than nonstudent households. The objectives of this study were to assess the prevalence and determinants of food insecurity among college students during the COVID-19 pandemic. We administered an online survey to 651 students on three diverse campuses at a state-funded university in Texas, US, in May 2020. Food security was assessed using a multistep approach that included the 2-item Food Sufficiency Screener and 6-Item USDA Food Security Survey Module (FSSM). Overall, 34.5% of respondents were classified as food insecure within the last 30 days. The strongest predictors of food insecurity were change in current living arrangement (OR = 2.70, 95% CI: 2.47, 2.95), being furloughed (OR = 3.22, 95% CI: 2.86, 3.64), laid off (OR = 4.07, 95% CI: 3.55, 4.66), or losing part-time work (OR = 5.73, 95% CI: 5.09, 6.46) due to the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings highlight the high prevalence of food insecurity among college students during the COVID-19 pandemic, with students who experienced housing insecurity and/or loss of income due to the pandemic being impacted the most.

We hypothesized that high-intensity interval training (HIIT) would be more effective than moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) at improving endothelial function and maximum oxygen uptake (V̇o2 max) in obese adults. Eighteen participants [35.1 ± 8.1 (SD) yr; body mass index = 36.0 ± 5.0 kg/m(2)] were randomized to 8 wk (3 sessions/wk) of either HIIT [10 × 1 min, 90-95% maximum heart rate (HRmax), 1-min active recovery] or MICT (30 min, 70-75% HRmax). Brachial artery flow-mediated dilation (FMD) increased after HIIT (5.13 ± 2.80% vs. 8.98 ± 2.86%, P = 0.02) but not after MICT (5.23 ± 2.82% vs. 3.05 ± 2.76%, P = 0.16). Resting artery diameter increased after MICT (3.68 ± 0.58 mm vs. 3.86 ± 0.58 mm, P = 0.02) but not after HIIT (4.04 ± 0.70 mm vs. 4.09 ± 0.70 mm; P = 0.63). There was a significant (P = 0.02) group × time interaction in low flow-mediated constriction (L-FMC) between MICT (0.63 ± 2.00% vs. -2.79 ± 3.20%; P = 0.03) and HIIT (-1.04 ± 4.09% vs. 1.74 ± 3.46%; P = 0.29). V̇o2 max increased (P < 0.01) similarly after HIIT (2.19 ± 0.65 l/min vs. 2.64 ± 0.88 l/min) and MICT (2.24 ± 0.48 l/min vs. 2.55 ± 0.61 l/min). Biomarkers of cardiovascular risk and endothelial function were unchanged. HIIT and MICT produced different vascular adaptations in obese adults, with HIIT improving FMD and MICT increasing resting artery diameter and enhancing L-FMC. HIIT required 27.5% less total exercise time and ∼25% less energy expenditure than MICT.

BackgroundEmerging interventions that rely on and harness variability in behavior to adapt to individual performance over time may outperform interventions that prescribe static goals (e.g., 10,000 steps/day). The purpose of this factorial trial was to compare adaptive vs. static goal setting and immediate vs. delayed, non-contingent financial rewards for increasing free-living physical activity (PA).MethodsA 4-month 2 × 2 factorial randomized controlled trial tested main effects for goal setting (adaptive vs. static goals) and rewards (immediate vs. delayed) and interactions between factors to increase steps/day as measured by a Fitbit Zip. Moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) minutes/day was examined as a secondary outcome.ResultsParticipants (N = 96) were mainly female (77%), aged 41 ± 9.5 years, and all were insufficiently active and overweight/obese (mean BMI = 34.1 ± 6.2). Participants across all groups increased by 2389 steps/day on average from baseline to intervention phase (p < .001). Participants receiving static goals showed a stronger increase in steps per day from baseline phase to intervention phase (2630 steps/day) than those receiving adaptive goals (2149 steps/day; difference = 482 steps/day, p = .095). Participants receiving immediate rewards showed stronger improvement (2762 step/day increase) from baseline to intervention phase than those receiving delayed rewards (2016 steps/day increase; difference = 746 steps/day, p = .009). However, the adaptive goals group showed a slower decrease in steps/day from the beginning of the intervention phase to the end of the intervention phase (i.e. less than half the rate) compared to the static goals group (−7.7 steps vs. -18.3 steps each day; difference = 10.7 steps/day, p < .001) resulting in better improvements for the adaptive goals group by study end. Rate of change over the intervention phase did not differ between reward groups. Significant goal phase x goal setting x reward interactions were observed.ConclusionsAdaptive goals outperformed static goals (i.e., 10,000 steps) over a 4-month period. Small immediate rewards outperformed larger, delayed rewards. Adaptive goals with either immediate or delayed rewards should be preferred for promoting PA.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02053259 registered prospectively on January 31, 2014.

A constant-load exercise bout to exhaustion after a graded exercise test to verify maximal oxygen uptake (V[Combining Dot Above]O2max) during cycle ergometry has not been evaluated in sedentary adults with obesity. Nineteen sedentary men (n = 10) and women (n = 9) with obesity (age = 35.8 ± 8.6 years; body mass index [BMI] = 35.9 ± 5.1 kg·m; body fat percentage = 44.9 ± 7.2) performed a ramp-style maximal exercise test (ramp), followed by 5-10 minutes of active recovery, and then performed a constant-load exercise bout to exhaustion (verification test) on a cycle ergometer for determination of V[Combining Dot Above]O2max and maximal heart rate (HRmax). V[Combining Dot Above]O2max did not differ between tests (ramp: 2.29 ± 0.71 L·min, verification: 2.34 ± 0.67 L·min; p = 0.38). Maximal heart rate was higher on the verification test (177 ± 13 b·min vs. 174 ± 16 b·min; p = 0.03). Thirteen subjects achieved a V[Combining Dot Above]O2max during the verification test that was ≥2% (range: 2.0-21.0%; 0.04-0.47 L·min) higher than during the ramp test, and 8 subjects achieved a HRmax during the verification test that was 4-14 b·min higher than during the ramp test. Duration of verification or ramp tests did not affect V[Combining Dot Above]O2max results, but the difference in HRmax between the tests was inversely correlated with ramp test duration (r = -0.57, p = 0.01). For both V[Combining Dot Above]O2max and HRmax, differences between ramp and verification tests were not correlated with BMI or body fat percentage. A verification test may be useful for identifying the highest V[Combining Dot Above]O2max and HRmax during cycle ergometry in sedentary adults with obesity.