Inger-Lise Aamot1, Siv Hege Forbord2, Kjersti Gustad3, Vibeke Løckra2, Andreas Stensen3, Astrid Tarlebø Berg2, Håvard Dalen4, Trine Karlsen5, Asbjørn Støylen6. 1. Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway St. Olav's University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway inger.lise.aamot@ntnu.no. 2. St. Olav's University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway. 3. Nord-Trøndelag Health Trust, Levanger, Norway. 4. Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway Nord-Trøndelag Health Trust, Levanger, Norway. 5. Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway. 6. Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway St. Olav's University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:High-intensity interval training (HIT) as exercise therapy is gradually implemented in cardiac rehabilitation as the cardiovascular benefits from exercise is intensity dependent. However, in previous studies, HIT has been performed with strict supervision. The aim of the study was to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of different modes of HIT in cardiac rehabilitation. DESIGN: a randomized clinical study. METHODS:Ninety participants with coronary artery disease (80 men/10 women, mean age 57 ± 8 years) were randomly assigned to one of three exercise modes: group exercise (GE), treadmill exercise (TE), or home-based exercise (HE). HIT was performed twice a week for 12 weeks with an exercise intensity of 85-95% of peak heart rate. The primary outcome measure was change in peak oxygen uptake (peak VO2). RESULTS: Eighty-three participants (92%) completed the intervention without any severe adverse events. Peak VO2 increased from 34.7 ± 7.3 to 39.0 ± 8.0 ml/kg/min, 32.7 ± 6.5 to 36.0 ± 6.2 ml/kg/min, and 34.4 ± 4.8 to 37.2 ± 5.2 ml/kg/min in TE, GE, and HE, respectively. Mean group difference for TE vs. HE was 1.6 ml/kg/min (95% confidence interval, CI, 0.7 to 3.1, p = 0.02), TE vs. GE 1.1 ml/kg/min (95% CI-0.5 to 2.5, p = 0.27), and GE vs. HE 0.6 ml/kg/min (95% CI -1.0 to 2.1, p = 1). However, on-treatment analysis showed no significant difference between groups. CONCLUSION: HIT was efficiently performed in three settings of cardiac rehabilitation, with respect to target exercise intensity, exercise attendance, and increase in peak VO2. Exercise mode was not essential for exercise capacity.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: High-intensity interval training (HIT) as exercise therapy is gradually implemented in cardiac rehabilitation as the cardiovascular benefits from exercise is intensity dependent. However, in previous studies, HIT has been performed with strict supervision. The aim of the study was to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of different modes of HIT in cardiac rehabilitation. DESIGN: a randomized clinical study. METHODS: Ninety participants with coronary artery disease (80 men/10 women, mean age 57 ± 8 years) were randomly assigned to one of three exercise modes: group exercise (GE), treadmill exercise (TE), or home-based exercise (HE). HIT was performed twice a week for 12 weeks with an exercise intensity of 85-95% of peak heart rate. The primary outcome measure was change in peak oxygen uptake (peak VO2). RESULTS: Eighty-three participants (92%) completed the intervention without any severe adverse events. Peak VO2 increased from 34.7 ± 7.3 to 39.0 ± 8.0 ml/kg/min, 32.7 ± 6.5 to 36.0 ± 6.2 ml/kg/min, and 34.4 ± 4.8 to 37.2 ± 5.2 ml/kg/min in TE, GE, and HE, respectively. Mean group difference for TE vs. HE was 1.6 ml/kg/min (95% confidence interval, CI, 0.7 to 3.1, p = 0.02), TE vs. GE 1.1 ml/kg/min (95% CI-0.5 to 2.5, p = 0.27), and GE vs. HE 0.6 ml/kg/min (95% CI -1.0 to 2.1, p = 1). However, on-treatment analysis showed no significant difference between groups. CONCLUSION:HIT was efficiently performed in three settings of cardiac rehabilitation, with respect to target exercise intensity, exercise attendance, and increase in peak VO2. Exercise mode was not essential for exercise capacity.
Authors: Randal J Thomas; Alexis L Beatty; Theresa M Beckie; LaPrincess C Brewer; Todd M Brown; Daniel E Forman; Barry A Franklin; Steven J Keteyian; Dalane W Kitzman; Judith G Regensteiner; Bonnie K Sanderson; Mary A Whooley Journal: J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev Date: 2019-07 Impact factor: 2.081
Authors: Randal J Thomas; Alexis L Beatty; Theresa M Beckie; LaPrincess C Brewer; Todd M Brown; Daniel E Forman; Barry A Franklin; Steven J Keteyian; Dalane W Kitzman; Judith G Regensteiner; Bonnie K Sanderson; Mary A Whooley Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2019-05-13 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Lindsey Anderson; Georgina A Sharp; Rebecca J Norton; Hasnain Dalal; Sarah G Dean; Kate Jolly; Aynsley Cowie; Anna Zawada; Rod S Taylor Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2017-06-30
Authors: Andrew N Stammers; D Scott Kehler; Jonathan Afilalo; Lorraine J Avery; Sean M Bagshaw; Hilary P Grocott; Jean-Francois Légaré; Sarvesh Logsetty; Colleen Metge; Thang Nguyen; Kenneth Rockwood; Jitender Sareen; Jo-Ann Sawatzky; Navdeep Tangri; Nicholas Giacomantonio; Ansar Hassan; Todd A Duhamel; Rakesh C Arora Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2015-03-09 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Kellie Toohey; Kate L Pumpa; Leonard Arnolda; Julie Cooke; Desmond Yip; Paul S Craft; Stuart Semple Journal: PeerJ Date: 2016-10-20 Impact factor: 2.984
Authors: Carolina Santiago de Araújo Pio; Gabriela Ss Chaves; Philippa Davies; Rod S Taylor; Sherry L Grace Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2019-02-01
Authors: Jos J Kraal; Niels Peek; M Elske van den Akker-Van Marle; Hareld M C Kemps Journal: BMC Cardiovasc Disord Date: 2013-10-08 Impact factor: 2.298