Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.
Changes in the fitness fatness index following reduced exertion high-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training in physically inactive adults |
Leahy DJ, Dalleck LC, Ramos JS |
Frontiers in Sports and Active Living 2022 Aug 5;4(961957):Epub |
clinical trial |
6/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: No; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: No; Adequate follow-up: Yes; Intention-to-treat analysis: Yes; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed* |
BACKGROUND: Many adults do not reach the recommended exercise participation guidelines, often citing lack of time as a barrier. Reduced exertion high-intensity training (REHIT) is a mode of exercise that takes as few as 10 min and has been shown to be as effective as other modalities. The Fitness Fatness Index (FFI) is a recently developed index that is used to predict cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of a REHIT versus a traditional moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) on FFI in physically inactive adults. METHODS: Thirty-two participants were randomized into one of two 8-week exercise intervention groups: (i) REHIT (n = 16); (ii) MICT (n = 16). The REHIT group performed 10 min of individualized cycling intervals on 2 to 4 days of the week. The MICT group were prescribed aerobic exercise at 50 to 65% of their heart rate reserve (HRR) on 3 to 5 days of the week. FFI was recorded at baseline and post 8-weeks, with FFI being calculated as cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) (expressed as metabolic equivalents) divided by waist to height ratio (WtHR). A 1-unit increase in FFI was recognized as a clinically significant change in FFI. RESULTS: The REHIT group showed significantly greater (+1.95, +/-0.63) improvements in FFI compared to those in the MICT (+0.99, +/-0.47) group (between group difference, p < 0.001). Furthermore, there was a greater proportion of participants who achieved a clinically significant change in FFI in the REHIT group (12/12, 100%) than in the MICT group (8/15, 53%) (between group difference, p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that REHIT may be a more efficacious exercise modality to increase FFI than MICT. This outcome is beneficial as the clinician can prescribe REHIT to physically inactive adults who cite lack of time as a barrier to physical activity participation and achieve significant reductions in CVD risk.
|