摘要
Background
An important component of secondary prevention of CVD (including HF) is comprehensive cardiac rehab, including exercise. Novel, individualised approaches are needed to increase uptake and adherence to exercise programmes, one area offering potential is HIIT. HIIT has been shown to be both safe and effective for improving cardiovascular fitness in both coronary artery disease and HF patients.
Objectives
To provide a current and up to date evaluation of the physiological and psychological outcomes of HIIT in patients with HF compared to MCT and UC. Secondly to perform sub-group analyses comparing short and long HIIT protocols.
Methods
A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials was undertaken. Medline, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL and SportDISCUS were searched up to July 2022. Trials were included if they carried out a HIIT intervention (defined at intensity ≥ 80% peak HR or ≥ 80% VO2peak) in HF patients (HFpEF or HFrEF) for at least 6 weeks. Comparator group was UC or MCT.
Results
HIIT was shown to be superior to MCT and UC for improving VO2peak (HIIT mean improvement 3.1 mL.kg−1min−1). HITT was superior to MCT and UC for improving LVEF (HIIT mean improvement 5.7%). HIIT was superior to MCT and UC for improving HRQoL, using the MLHFQ (HIIT mean point change of -12.8). Subgroup analysis showed no difference between long and short HIIT.
An important component of secondary prevention of CVD (including HF) is comprehensive cardiac rehab, including exercise. Novel, individualised approaches are needed to increase uptake and adherence to exercise programmes, one area offering potential is HIIT. HIIT has been shown to be both safe and effective for improving cardiovascular fitness in both coronary artery disease and HF patients.
Objectives
To provide a current and up to date evaluation of the physiological and psychological outcomes of HIIT in patients with HF compared to MCT and UC. Secondly to perform sub-group analyses comparing short and long HIIT protocols.
Methods
A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials was undertaken. Medline, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL and SportDISCUS were searched up to July 2022. Trials were included if they carried out a HIIT intervention (defined at intensity ≥ 80% peak HR or ≥ 80% VO2peak) in HF patients (HFpEF or HFrEF) for at least 6 weeks. Comparator group was UC or MCT.
Results
HIIT was shown to be superior to MCT and UC for improving VO2peak (HIIT mean improvement 3.1 mL.kg−1min−1). HITT was superior to MCT and UC for improving LVEF (HIIT mean improvement 5.7%). HIIT was superior to MCT and UC for improving HRQoL, using the MLHFQ (HIIT mean point change of -12.8). Subgroup analysis showed no difference between long and short HIIT.
| 源语言 | English |
|---|---|
| 页(从-至) | 117-127 |
| 页数 | 10 |
| 期刊 | Heart & Lung |
| 卷 | 64 |
| DOI | |
| 出版状态 | Published - 1 3月 2024 |
联合国可持续发展目标
此成果有助于实现下列可持续发展目标:
-
Good health and well being
学术指纹
探究 'Physiological and psychological outcomes of high intensity interval training in patients with heart failure compared to moderate continuous training and usual care: A systematic review with meta analysis' 的科研主题。它们共同构成独一无二的学术指纹。引用此
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver