The effect of high Intensity interval training versus moderate intensity continuous training on arterial stiffness and 24h blood pressure responses: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Greater arterial stiffness and poor 24h blood pressure (BP) are recognized as indicators of poor cardiovascular health. Evidence has shown that high intensity interval training (HIIT) may be a superior alternative to moderate intensity continuous training (MICT) for improving cardiovascular disease risk factors such as cardiorespiratory fitness and vascular function. However, there are limited data comparing the effect of HIIT to MICT on central arterial stiffness and/or 24h BP response. The purpose of this study was to compare HIIT versus MICT on central arterial stiffness and 24h BP outcomes by systematic review and meta-analysis.
A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted.
Eligible studies were exercise training interventions (≥4weeks) that included both HIIT and MICT and reported central arterial stiffness, as measured by pulse wave velocity and augmentation index and/or 24h BP outcome measures.
HIIT was found to be superior to MICT for reducing night-time diastolic BP (ES: -0.456, 95% CI: -0.826 to -0.086mmHg; P=0.016). A near-significant greater reduction in daytime systolic (ES: -0.349, 95% CI: -0.740 to 0.041mmHg; p=0.079) and diastolic BP was observed with HIIT compared to MICT (ES: -0.349, 95% CI: -0.717 to 0.020mmHg; p=0.063). No significant difference was found for other BP responses or arterial stiffness outcomes.
HIIT leads to a superior reduction in night-time diastolic BP compared to MICT. Furthermore, a near-significant greater reduction in daytime BP was found with HIIT compared to MICT. No significant difference was observed for changes to central arterial stiffness between HIIT and MICT.
Way KL
，Sultana RN
，Sabag A
，Baker MK
，Johnson NA
... -
《-》
The impact of sprint interval training versus moderate intensity continuous training on blood pressure and cardiorespiratory health in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Although aerobic exercise is the primary modality recommended for the treatment of hypertension, it remains unclear whether high-intensity all-out sprint interval training (SIT) can result in greater reductions of blood pressure (BP) and cardiorespiratory health. This systematic review aims to compare the impact of SIT versus Moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) on improvements in resting systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and maximal oxygen uptake (VO2 max) among adults.
We conducted a systematic search of three online databases (PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science) from January 2000 to July 2023 to identify randomized controlled trials that compared the chronic effects of SIT versus MICT on BP in participants with high or normal blood pressure. We extracted information on participant characteristics, exercise protocols, BP outcomes, and intervention settings. Furthermore, the changes in VO2 max between the two groups were analyzed using a meta-analysis. The pooled results were presented as weighted means with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
Out of the 1,874 studies initially were found, eight were included in this review, totaling 169 participants. A significant decrease in SBP (MD = -2.82 mmHg, 95% CI [-4.53 to -1.10], p = 0.08, I2 =45%) was observed in the SIT group compared to before the training, but no significant decrease in DBP (MD = -0.75 mmHg, 95% CI [-1.92 to 0.42], p = 0.16, I2 = 33%) was observed. In contrast, both SBP (MD = -3.00 mmHg, 95% CI [-5.31 to -0.69], p = 0.68, I2 = 0%) and DBP (MD = -2.11 mmHg, 95% CI [-3.63 to -0.60], p = 0.72, I2 = 0%) significantly decreased in the MICT group with low heterogeneity. No significant difference was found in resting SBP and DBP between SIT and MICT after the intervention. Both SIT and MICT significantly increased VO2 peak, with SIT resulting in a mean difference (MD) of 1.75 mL/kg/min (95% CI [0.39-3.10], p = 0.02, I2 = 61%), and MICT resulting in a mean difference of 3.10 mL/kg/min (95% CI [1.03-5.18], p = 0.007, I2 = 69%). MICT was more effective in improving VO2 peak (MD = -1.36 mL/kg/min, 95% CI [-2.31 to 0.40], p = 0.56, I2 = 0%). Subgroup analysis of duration and single sprint time showed that SIT was more effective in reducing SBP when the duration was ≥8 weeks or when the sprint time was <30 s.
Our meta-analysis showed that SIT is an effective intervention in reducing BP and improving cardiorespiratory fitness among adults. Consequently, SIT can be used in combination with traditional MICT to increase the variety, utility, and time efficiency of exercise prescriptions for different populations.
Liang W
，Liu C
，Yan X
，Hou Y
，Yang G
，Dai J
，Wang S
... -
《-》
High-intensity interval training reduces blood pressure in older adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
The current systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the effects of High-Intensity Interval Training (HIIT) on blood pressure (BP) in older adults and compared the efficacy of HIIT versus moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT).
Search was conducted using the databases at PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library and EMBASE, for randomized trials comparing the chronic effects (≥4 weeks) of HIIT versus MICT or control group (non-exercise) on BP in older adults (≥60 years) with or without hypertension.
A total of 10 articles (n = 266 participants) were included in this meta-analysis. HIIT were associated with reductions in systolic BP (MD -7.36; 95%CI -11.80 to -2.92; P < 0.01; I2 = 24%) and diastolic BP (MD -5.48; 95%CI -8.71 to -2.25; P < 0.01; I2 = 40%) versus control group. No differences were found between HIIT and MICT in systolic BP (MD -2.09; 95%CI -9.76 to 5.58; P = 0.59; I2 = 0%) and diastolic BP (MD -1.00; 95%CI -6.01 to 4.01; P = 0.69; I2 = 0%).
HIIT reduces BP in older adults. Additionally, HIIT and MICT provided comparable reductions on BP in this population.
Carpes L
，Costa R
，Schaarschmidt B
，Reichert T
，Ferrari R
... -
《-》
ResearchGate
(全网免费下载)
钛学术
(全网免费下载)
