High-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training within cardiac rehabilitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Amanda L Hannan, Wayne Hing, Vini Simas, Mike Climstein, Jeff S Coombes, Rohan Jayasinghe, Joshua Byrnes, James Furness, Amanda L Hannan, Wayne Hing, Vini Simas, Mike Climstein, Jeff S Coombes, Rohan Jayasinghe, Joshua Byrnes, James Furness

Abstract

Background: Aerobic capacity has been shown to be inversely proportionate to cardiovascular mortality and morbidity and there is growing evidence that high-intensity interval training (HIIT) appears to be more effective than moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) in improving cardiorespiratory fitness within the cardiac population. Previously published systematic reviews in cardiovascular disease have neither investigated the effect that the number of weeks of intervention has on cardiorespiratory fitness changes, nor have adverse events been collated.

Objective: We aimed to undertake a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) within the cardiac population that investigated cardiorespiratory fitness changes resulting from HIIT versus MICT and to collate adverse events.

Methods: A critical narrative synthesis and meta-analysis was conducted after systematically searching relevant databases up to July 2017. We searched for RCTs that compared cardiorespiratory fitness changes resulting from HIIT versus MICT interventions within the cardiac population.

Results: Seventeen studies, involving 953 participants (465 for HIIT and 488 for MICT) were included in the analysis. HIIT was significantly superior to MICT in improving cardiorespiratory fitness overall (SMD 0.34 mL/kg/min; 95% confidence interval [CI; 0.2-0.48]; p<0.00001; I2=28%). There were no deaths or cardiac events requiring hospitalization reported in any study during training. Overall, there were more adverse events reported as a result of the MICT (n=14) intervention than the HIIT intervention (n=9). However, some adverse events (n=5) were not classified by intervention group.

Conclusion: HIIT is superior to MICT in improving cardiorespiratory fitness in participants of cardiac rehabilitation (CR). Improvements in cardiorespiratory fitness are significant for CR programs of >6-week duration. Programs of 7-12 weeks' duration resulted in the largest improvements in cardiorespiratory fitness for patients with coronary artery disease. HIIT appears to be as safe as MICT for CR participants.

Keywords: cardiac rehabilitation; cardiovascular disease; coronary artery disease; exercise; intensity; interval training; physical therapy.

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosure The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work and the research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
PRISMA diagram of literature search strategies. Abbreviation: PRISMA, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Forest plots depicting aerobic capacity changes as a result of HIIT versus MICT (standard mean difference in mL/kg/min). Abbreviations: HIIT, high-intensity interval training; MICT, moderate-intensity continuous training; IV, inverse variance; CI, confidence interval; SD, standard deviation.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Funnel plot of publication bias.

References

    1. Lozano R, Naghavi M, Foreman K, et al. Global and regional mortality from 235 causes of death for 20 age groups in 1990 and 2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet. 2012;380(9859):2095–2128.
    1. Heran BS, Chen JM, Ebrahim S, et al. Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for coronary heart disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;(7):CD001800.
    1. Taylor RS, Brown A, Ebrahim S, et al. Exercise-based rehabilitation for patients with coronary heart disease: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Med. 2004;116(10):682–692.
    1. National Heart Foundation of Australia Secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. 2010. [Accessed August 1, 2017]. Available from:
    1. Anderson L, Thompson DR, Oldridge N, et al. Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for coronary artery disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;(1):CD001800.
    1. Price KJ, Gordon BA, Bird SR, Benson AC. A review of guidelines for cardiac rehabilitaiton exercise programmes: is there an international consensus? Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2016;23(16):1715–1733.
    1. Woodruffe S, Neubeck L, Clark RA, et al. Australian Cardiovascular Health and Rehabilitation Association (ACRA) core components of cardiovascular disease secondary prevention and cardiac rehabilitation 2014. Heart Lung Circ. 2015;24(5):430–441.
    1. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) Cardiac Rehabilitation. A National Clinical Guideline. Edinburgh, Scotland: Sign; 2002.
    1. Mezzani A, Hamm LF, Jones AM, et al. Aerobic exercise intensity assessment and prescription in cardiac rehabilitation: a joint position statement of the European Association for Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation, the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation and the Canadian Association of Cardiac Rehabilitation. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2013;20(3):442–467.
    1. American College of Sports Medicine . ACSM’s Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Prescription. 9th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2013.
    1. Myers J, Prakash M, Froelicher V, Do D, Partington S, Atwood JE. Exercise capacity and mortality among men referred for exercise testing. N Engl J Med. 2002;346(11):793–801.
    1. Swain DP, Franklin BA. Comparison of cardioprotective benefits of vigorous versus moderate intensity aerobic exercise. Am J Cardiol. 2006;97(1):141–147.
    1. Keteyian SJ, Brawner CA, Savage PD, et al. Peak aerobic capacity predicts prognosis in patients with coronary heart disease. Am Heart J. 2008;156(2):292–300.
    1. Ehsani AA, Heath GW, Hagberg JM, Sobel BE, Holloszy JO. Effects of 12 months of intense exercise training on ischemic ST-segment depression in patients with coronary artery disease. Circulation. 1981;64(6):1116–1124.
    1. Cornish AK, Broadbent S, Cheema BS. Interval training for patients with coronary artery disease: a systematic review. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2011;111(4):579–589.
    1. Pattyn N, Coeckelberghs E, Buys R, Cornelissen VA, Vanhees L. Aerobic interval training vs. moderate continuous training in coronary artery disease patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Med. 2014;44(5):687–700.
    1. Elliott AD, Rajopadhyaya K, Bentley DJ, Beltrame JF, Aromataris EC. Interval training versus continuous exercise in patients with coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis. Heart Lung Circ. 2015;24(2):149–157.
    1. Liou K, Ho S, Fildes J, Ooi SY. High intensity interval versus moderate intensity continuous training in patients with coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis of physiological and clinical parameters. Heart Lung Circ. 2016;25(2):166–174.
    1. Kessler HS, Sisson SB, Short KR. The potential for high-intensity interval training to reduce cardiometabolic disease risk. Sports Med. 2012;42(6):489–509.
    1. Gibala MJ, Little JP, Macdonald MJ, Hawley JA. Physiological adaptations to low-volume, high intensity interval training in health and disease. J Physiol. 2012;590(5):1077–1084.
    1. Boutcher SH. High-intensity intermittent exercise and fat loss. J Obes. 2011;2011:868305.
    1. Rognmo Ø, Moholdt T, Bakken H, et al. Cardiovascular risk of high-versus moderate-intensity aerobic exercise in coronary heart disease patients. Circulation. 2012;126(12):1436–1440.
    1. Booth A, Clarke M, Dooley G, et al. The nuts and bolts of PROSPERO: an international prospective register of systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2012;1:2.
    1. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses:the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(4):264–269. W64.
    1. Verhagen AP, de Vet HC, de Bie RA, et al. The Delphi list: a criteria list for quality assessment of randomized clinical trials for conducting systematic reviews developed by Delphi consensus. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998;51(12):1235–1241.
    1. Kennelly J. Methodological Approach to Assessing the Evidence. In: Handler A, Kennelly J, Peacock N, editors. Reducing Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Reproductive and Perinatal Outcomes. Boston, MA: Springer; 2011.
    1. Lyons K, Radburn C, Orr R, Pope R. A profile of injuries sustained by law enforcement officers: a critical review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2017;14(2) pii: E142.
    1. Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.1. Oxford: Cochrane Collaboration; 2011.
    1. Simas V, Hing W, Pope R, Climstein M. Effects of water-based exercise on bone health of middle-aged and older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Open Access J Sports Med. 2017;8:39–60.
    1. Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, Cochrane Bias Methods Group. Cochrane Statistical Methods Group The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2011;343:d5928.
    1. Jensen BE, Fletcher BJ, Rupp JC, Fletcher GF, Lee JY, Oberman A. Training level comparison study. Effect of high and low intensity exercise on ventilatory threshold in men with coronary artery disease. J Cardiopulm Rehabil. 1996;16(4):227–232.
    1. Rognmo Ø, Hetland E, Helgerud J, Hoff J, Slørdahl SA. High intensity aerobic interval exercise is superior to moderate intensity exercise for increasing aerobic capacity in patients with coronary artery disease. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil. 2004;11(3):216–222.
    1. Warburton DE, McKenzie DC, Haykowsky MJ, et al. Effectiveness of high-intensity interval training for the rehabilitation of patients with coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol. 2005;95(9):1080–1084.
    1. Amundsen BH, Rognmo Ø, Hatlen-Rebhan G, Slørdahl SA. High-intensity aerobic exercise improves diastolic function in coronary artery disease. Scand Cardiovasc J. 2008;42(2):110–117.
    1. Moholdt TT, Amundsen BH, Rustad LA, et al. Aerobic interval training versus continuous moderate exercise after coronary artery bypass surgery: a randomized study of cardiovascular effects and quality of life. Am Heart J. 2009;158(6):1031–1037.
    1. Benetti M, Araujo CL, Santos RZ. Cardiorespiratory fitness and quality of life at different exercise intensities after myocardial infarction. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2010;95(3):399–404.
    1. Moholdt T, Aamot IL, Granøien I, et al. Aerobic interval training increases peak oxygen uptake more than usual care exercise training in myocardial infarction patients: a randomized controlled study. Clin Rehabil. 2012;26(1):33–44.
    1. Rocco EA, Prado DM, Silva AG, et al. Effect of continuous and interval exercise training on the PETCO2 response during a graded exercise test in patients with coronary artery disease. Clinics (Sao Paulo) 2012;67(6):623–628.
    1. Currie KD, Dubberley JB, McKelvie RS, MacDonald MJ. Low-volume, high-intensity interval training in patients with CAD. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2013;45(8):1436–1442.
    1. Keteyian SJ, Hibner BA, Bronsteen K, et al. Greater improvement in cardiorespiratory fitness using higher-intensity interval training in the standard cardiac rehabilitation setting. J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev. 2014;34(2):98–105.
    1. Cardozo GG, Oliveira RB, Farinatti PT. Effects of high intensity interval versus moderate continuous training on markers of ventilatory and cardiac efficiency in coronary heart disease patients. ScientificWorld-Journal. 2015;2015:192479.
    1. Conraads VM, Pattyn N, De Maeyer C, et al. Aerobic interval training and continuous training equally improve aerobic exercise capacity in patients with coronary artery disease: the SAINTEX-CAD study. Int J Cardiol. 2015;179:203–210.
    1. Currie KD, Bailey KJ, Jung ME, McKelvie RS, MacDonald MJ. Effects of resistance training combined with moderate-intensity endurance or low-volume high-intensity interval exercise on cardiovascular risk factors in patients with coronary artery disease. J Sci Med Sport. 2015;18(6):637–642.
    1. Kim C, Choi HE, Lim MH. Effect of high interval training in acute myocardial infarction patients with drug-eluting stent. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2015;94(10 Suppl 1):879–886.
    1. Jaureguizar KV, Vicente-Campos D, Bautista LR, et al. Effect of high-intensity interval versus continuous exercise training on functional capacity and quality of life in patients with coronary artery disease: a randomized clinical trial. J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev. 2016;36(2):96–105.
    1. Möbius-Winkler S, Uhlemann M, Adams V, et al. Coronary collateral growth induced by physical exercise: results of the impact of intensive exercise training on coronary collateral circulation in patients with stable coronary artery disease (EXCITE) trial. Circulation. 2016;133(15):1438–1448.
    1. Prado DM, Rocco EA, Silva AG, et al. Effects of continuous vs interval exercise training on oxygen uptake efficiency slope in patients with coronary artery disease. Braz J Med Biol Res. 2016;49(2):e4890.
    1. Pattyn N, Vanhees L, Cornelissen VA, et al. The long-term effects of a randomized trial comparing aerobic interval versus continuous training in coronary artery disease patients: 1-year data from the SAINTEX-CAD study. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2016;23(11):1154–1164.
    1. Biddle SJ, Batterham AM. High-intensity interval exercise training for public health: a big HIT or shall we HIT it on the head? Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2015;12:95.
    1. Jung ME, Bourne JE, Beauchamp MR, Robinson E, Little JP. High-intensity interval training as an efficacious alternative to moderate-intensity continuous training for adults with prediabetes. J Diabetes Res. 2015;2015:191595.
    1. Thum JS, Parsons G, Whittle T, Astorino TA. High-intensity interval training elicits higher enjoyment than moderate intensity continuous exercise. PLoS One. 2017;12(1):e0166299.
    1. Martinez N, Kilpatrick MW, Salomon K, Jung ME, Little JP. Affective and enjoyment responses to high-intensity interval training in overweight-to-obese and insufficiently active adults. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2015;37(2):138–149.

Source: PubMed

Sponsor e collaboratori

Condizioni mediche

Interventi farmacologici

3
Sottoscrivi