High-Intensity Interval Training Versus Moderate-Intensity Continuous Training in the Prevention/Management of Cardiovascular Disease

Hussain, Syed Robiul; Macaluso, Andrea; Pearson, Stephen

doi:10.1097/crd.0000000000000124

Cited by 69 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 148 publications

(181 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It is currently debated whether HIIT is a training modality that is useful in daily clinical practice . HIIT has been reported to be safe, even in selected high‐risk populations with cardiovascular disease, but many HIIT protocols for clinical populations with elevated cardiovascular risk have been modified to be less strenuous and some authors advocate to be cautious when prescribing HIIT to patients with cardiometabolic disease . A recent large‐scale study concluded that HIIT feasibility in heart failure patients remains unsolved, while a pilot trial in obese, middle‐aged subjects (mostly women) concluded that HIIT may be appropriate and attainable for this population …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of one‐legged high‐intensity interval training on insulin‐mediated skeletal muscle glucose homeostasis in patients with type 2 diabetes

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim To examine the effect of high‐intensity interval training (HIIT) on glucose clearance rates in skeletal muscle and explore the mechanism within the muscle. Methods Ten males with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and ten matched healthy subjects performed 2 weeks of one‐legged HIIT (total of eight sessions, each comprised of 10 × 1 minute ergometer bicycle exercise at >80% of maximal heart rate, interspersed with one min of rest). Insulin sensitivity was assessed by an isoglycaemic, hyperinsulinaemic clamp combined with arteriovenous leg balance technique of the trained (T) and the untrained (UT) leg and muscle biopsies of both legs. Results Insulin‐stimulated glucose clearance in T legs was ~30% higher compared with UT legs in both groups due to increased blood flow in T vs UT legs and maintained glucose extraction. With each training session, muscle glycogen content decreased only in the training leg, and after the training, glycogen synthase and citrate synthase activities were higher in T vs UT legs. No major changes occurred in the expression of proteins in the insulin signalling cascade. Mitochondrial respiratory capacity was similar in T2DM and healthy subjects, and unchanged by HIIT. Conclusion HIIT improves skeletal muscle insulin sensitivity. With HIIT, the skeletal muscle of patients with T2DM becomes just as insulin sensitive as untrained muscle in healthy subjects. The mechanism includes oscillations in muscle glycogen stores and a maintained ability to extract glucose from the blood in the face of increased blood flow in the trained leg.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of one‐legged high‐intensity interval training on insulin‐mediated skeletal muscle glucose homeostasis in patients with type 2 diabetes

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although primarily seen in the training procedures of elite athletes, HIT is now gaining an increasing role in rehabilitation, particularly in cardiovascular patients. 2,18 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of high-intensity training on endothelial function in patients with cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease: A systematic review

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives:Exercise improves endothelial dysfunction, the key manifestation of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease, and is recommended in both cardiovascular and cerebrovascular rehabilitation. Disagreement remains, however, on the role of intensity of exercise. The purpose of this review was to gather current knowledge on the effects of high-intensity training versus moderate-intensity continuous exercise on endothelial function in cardiovascular and cerebrovascular patients.Methods:A systematic review was performed in PubMed database, Embase and Cochrane libraries and on PEDro using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Studies were restricted to cardiovascular and cerebrovascular patients, and healthy subjects as general reference. Interventions comprised of high-intensity training alone, high-intensity training compared to moderate-intensity continuous exercise, or no training, with endothelial function as outcome measure. Endothelial function was measured either physiologically by flow-mediated dilatation and/or by systemic biomarkers. Data were analyzed descriptively due to non-comparability for a meta-analysis to be performed.Results:A total of 20 studies were included in the review. Although there was great heterogenecity in design, population and exercise protocols, all studies found high-intensity training to be safe. High-intensity training was equal to moderate-intensity continuous exercise through improvement in endothelial function in 15 of the 20 selected studies, as measured by flow-mediated dilatation, nitric oxide bioavailability and circulating biomarkers. Only a few studies examined high-intensity training in cerebrovascular patients, none with endothelial function as outcome.Conclusion:High-intensity training is promising as a time-efficient exercise strategy in cardiovascular rehabilitation, but data on endothelial effects in cerebrovascular rehabilitation are warranted. Agreement on a more uniform exercise protocol is essential to further investigate the optimal exercise mode for cerebrovascular rehabilitation.

show abstract

“…Physical benefits related to high-intensity interval training 8,24 and a sense of community have led CrossFit to an unprecedented level of global popularity. 39 CrossFit is a strength and conditioning exercise program with constantly varied multiarticular functional movements and high-intensity intermittent exercise sessions designed to improve fitness and health.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

CrossFit and the Epidemiology of Musculoskeletal Injuries: A Prospective 12-Week Cohort Study

Szeles

Costa

Cunha

et al. 2020

Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Despite the increasing international popularity of CrossFit, there is a paucity of scientific evidence on the risk of CrossFit-related musculoskeletal injuries (CRMIs). Purpose: To investigate the incidence (cumulative incidence proportion [IP] and incidence density [ID]) of CRMIs and the association of CRMIs with personal and training characteristics. Study Design: Descriptive epidemiology study. Methods: A prospective, 12-week descriptive epidemiology cohort study was conducted in a convenience sample of CrossFit facilities in a single Brazilian city. Printed baseline questionnaires were distributed to 13 CrossFit boxes. All participants who filled out the questionnaire and consented to participate in the study were invited to respond to an online follow-up questionnaire every 2 weeks to collect data on CrossFit training characteristics and CRMIs. A CRMI was defined as any self-reported musculoskeletal injury or pain that prevented an athlete from exercising for at least 1 day. The IP was defined as the number of new cases divided by the entire population at risk, while the ID was defined as new events divided by the total person-time exposure in hours. Logistic mixed models were developed to investigate the association of CRMIs with personal and training characteristics. Results: A total of 515 CrossFit participants filled out the baseline questionnaire and provided informed consent, and 406 (78.8%) completed at least 1 follow-up measure. There were 133 participants who reported at least 1 CRMI during the study, and a total of 247 unique and new CRMIs were reported over a total estimated person-time exposure to CrossFit of 13,041 hours. The IP was 32.8% (95% CI, 28.4%-37.5%). The ID was 18.9 (95% CI, 16.6-21.3) per 1000 hours of CrossFit exposure. The shoulders (19.0%; n = 47) and lumbar spine (15.0%; n = 37) were most affected. Muscle injuries (45.3%; n = 112) and joint pain (24.7%; n = 61) were the most common CRMI types reported. Switching between prescribed and scaled down training loads (odds ratio [OR], 3.5 [95% CI, 1.7-7.3]) and previous injuries (OR, 3.2 [95% CI, 1.4-7.7]) were risk factors for a CRMI, while CrossFit experience was identified as a protective factor (OR, 0.7 [95% CI, 0.5-1.0]). Conclusion: In this 12-week prospective study, the ID was 18.9 CRMIs per 1000 hours of exposure; switching between training loads and previous injuries was associated with 3.5- and 3.2-fold higher odds, respectively, of sustaining CRMIs.

show abstract

High-Intensity Interval Training Versus Moderate-Intensity Continuous Training in the Prevention/Management of Cardiovascular Disease

Cited by 69 publications

References 148 publications

Effects of one‐legged high‐intensity interval training on insulin‐mediated skeletal muscle glucose homeostasis in patients with type 2 diabetes

Effects of one‐legged high‐intensity interval training on insulin‐mediated skeletal muscle glucose homeostasis in patients with type 2 diabetes

Effect of high-intensity training on endothelial function in patients with cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease: A systematic review

CrossFit and the Epidemiology of Musculoskeletal Injuries: A Prospective 12-Week Cohort Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About