Explore the vast range of titles available.

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of 5-week high-intensity interval training (HIIT) and moderate-to-vigorous intensity continuous training (MVCT) on cardiometabolic health outcomes and enjoyment of exercise in obese young women. A randomized controlled experiment was conducted that involved thirty-one obese females (age range of 18-30) randomly assigned to either HIIT or MVCT five-week training programs. Participants in HIIT condition performed 20 min of repeated 8 s cycling interspersed with 12 s rest intervals, and those in MVCT condition cycled continuously for 40 min at 60-80% of peak oxygen consumption ([Formula: see text]O2peak), both for four days in a week. Outcomes such as [Formula: see text]O2peak, body composition estimated by bioimpedance analysis, blood lipids, and serum sexual hormones were measured at pre-and post-training. The scores of Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale (PAES) were collected during the intervention. After training, [Formula: see text]O2peak increased significantly for both training programs (9.1% in HIIT and 10.3% in MVCT) (p = 0.010, η2 = 0.41). Although MVCT group had a significant reduction in total body weight (TBW, -1.8%, p = 0.034), fat mass (FM, - 4.7%, p = 0.002) and percentage body fat (PBF, -2.9%, p = 0.016), there were no significant between-group differences in the change of the pre- and post-measures of these variables. The HIIT group had a higher score on PAES than the MVCT group during the intervention. For both conditions, exercise training led to a decline in resting testosterone and estradiol levels, but had no significant effect on blood lipids. Both HIIT and MVCT are effective in improving cardiorespiratory fitness and in reducing sexual hormones in obese young women; however, HIIT is a more enjoyable and time-efficient strategy. The mild-HIIT protocol seems to be useful for at least maintaining the body weight among sedentary individuals.

The aim was to undertake secondary data analysis from a three-arm randomised feasibility trial of high intensity interval training (HIIT), moderate intensity continuous training (MICT), and usual care control in adults with Crohn's disease (CD; n = 36), with a primary focus on exploring affective and enjoyment responses. Twenty-five participants with quiescent or mildly-active CD were randomised to one of the two exercise groups: HIIT (n = 13) and MICT (n = 12). Both groups were offered thrice weekly sessions for 12 weeks. MICT consisted of cycling for 30 minutes at 35% peak power (Wpeak), whereas HIIT involved ten 1-minute bouts at 90% Wpeak, interspersed with 1-minute bouts at 15% Wpeak. Heart rate (HR), differentiated ratings of perceived exertion for legs (RPE-L) and central (RPE-C), along with feeling state (Feeling Scale; FS) were measured at 92.5% of each session. Enjoyment was measured at the end of training using the Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale (PACES). Post-hoc exploratory analysis involved a mixed-model two-way ANOVA to compare HR, RPE-L, RPE-C and FS for the exercise sessions in weeks 1, 6 and 12 between groups. Overall, HR was greater (p < 0.01) during HIIT (173 ± 8 bpm) compared with MICT (128 ± 6 bpm). Similarly, RPE-L and RPE-C responses were greater overall (p = 0.03 and p = 0.03, respectively) during HIIT (5.5 ± 1.6 and 5.1 ± 1.7, respectively) compared to MICT (3.3 ± 1.5 and 2.9 ± 1.5, respectively). Overall, FS was 2.2 ± 1.9 for HIIT and 2.1 ± 1.4 for MICT with no effect of treatment group (p = 0.25) or time (p = 0.94). There was also no significant difference in PACES scores between HIIT (99.4 ± 12.9) and MICT (101.3 ± 17.4; p = 0.78). The findings suggest HIIT and MICT protocols elicited similar enjoyment and affect in adults with quiescent or mildly-active CD.

IntroductionThis trial aims to investigate the impact of a school-based physical activity programme, involving high-intensity interval training (HIIT), on the physical, mental and cognitive health of senior school students.Methods and analysisThe Burn 2 Learn (B2L) intervention will be evaluated using a two-arm parallel group cluster randomised controlled trial with allocation occurring at the school level (to treatment or wait-list control). Schools will be recruited in two cohorts from New South Wales, Australia. The trial will aim to recruit ~720 senior school students (aged 16–18 years) from 20 secondary schools (ie, 10 schools per cohort). A range of implementation strategies will be provided to teachers (eg, training, equipment and support) to facilitate the delivery of HIIT sessions during scheduled classes. In phase I and II (3 months each), teachers will facilitate the delivery of at least two HIIT sessions/week during lesson-time. In phase III (6 months), students will be encouraged to complete sessions outside of lesson-time (teachers may continue to facilitate the delivery of B2L sessions during lesson-time). Study outcomes will be assessed at baseline, 6 months (primary end point) and 12 months. Cardiorespiratory fitness (shuttle run test) is the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes include: vigorous physical activity, muscular fitness, cognition and mental health. A subsample of students will (i) provide hair samples to determine their accumulated exposure to stressful events and (ii) undergo multimodal MRI to examine brain structure and function. A process evaluation will be conducted (ie, recruitment, retention, attendance and programme satisfaction).Ethics and disseminationThis study has received approval from the University of Newcastle (H-2016–0424) and the NSW Department of Education (SERAP: 2017116) human research ethics committees.Trial registration numberACTRN12618000293268; Pre-results.

The study examined the effects of exercise on health-fitness, health related quality of life (HRQOL), and psychological measures in college-aged smokers. Outcomes included HRQOL, hemodynamic, anthropometric, lung function, and cardiorespiratory endurance. Sixty physically inactive college-aged male smokers (18–30 years) were randomly assigned into three groups: high-intensity interval training (HIIT), continuous aerobic training (CAT), and a control (CON). Both HIIT and CAT groups completed 8 weeks of non-consecutive cycling sessions thrice weekly. The CON group were not subjected to the exercise intervention. Sixty participants met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 48 (HIIT: n = 18, CAT: n = 16, CON: n = 14) participants completed the study and were included in the final analysis. Compared to CON, HIIT significantly (p = 0.01) improved forced expiratory flow (FEF_75%) more than the CAT group (p = 0.29). HIIT provided a significant (p = 0.04) improvement in FEF_75% compared to CAT. Recovery heart rate (RHR) was significantly improved in participants assigned to HIIT (p = 0.00) and CAT (p = 0.002) groups compared with the CON. A significant difference in RHR was found in HIIT compared to CAT. The study findings indicate that both HIIT and CAT exercise interventions significantly improve markers of lung function and cardiorespiratory endurance, respectively. However, findings suggested that HIIT should be the preferred form of exercise regime among college-aged smokers for more significant, healthier benefits.

We compared physiological and psychological responses between low-volume high-intensity interval training (LV-HIIT) sessions with different work-recovery durations. Ten adult males performed two LV-HIIT sessions in a randomized, counter-balanced order. Specifically, 60/60 s LV-HIIT and 30/30 s LV-HIIT. Oxygen uptake (VO ), carbon dioxide output (VCO ), ventilation (VE), respiratory exchange ratio (RER), perceived exertion (RPE), and affect were assessed. During intervals, the VO (3.25 ± 0.57 vs. 2.83 ± 0.50 L/min), VCO (3.15 ± 0.61 vs. 2.93 ± 0.58 L/min), VE (108.59 ± 27.39 vs. 94.28 ± 24.98 L/min), and RPE (15.9 ± 1.5 vs. 13.9 ± 1.5) were higher (ps ≤ 0.01), while RER (0.98 ± 0.05 vs. 1.03 ± 0.03) and affect (-0.8 ± 1.4 vs. 1.1 ± 2.0) were lower (ps ≤ 0.007) in the 60/60 s LV-HIIT. During recovery periods, VO (1.85 ± 0.27 vs. 2.38 ± 0.46 L/min), VCO (2.15 ± 0.35 vs. 2.44 ± 0.45 L/min), and affect (0.6 ± 1.7 vs. 1.7 ± 1.8) were lower (ps ≤ 0.02), while RER (1.20 ± 0.05 vs. 1.03 ± 0.05; p < 0.001) was higher in the 60/60 s LV-HIIT. Shorter LV-HIIT (30 s) elicits lower physiological response and attenuated negative affect than longer LV-HIIT (60 s).

High-intensity interval training (HIIT) consists of short intervals of exercise at high intensity intermitted by intervals of lower intensity and is associated with improvement of body composition and metabolic health in adults. Studies in overweight adolescents are scarce. We conducted a randomized controlled trial in overweight adolescents to compare acceptance and attendance of HIIT with or without weekly motivational encouragement through text messages and access to a study website. HIIT was offered for six months (including summer vacation) twice a week (60 min/session). Participation rates were continuously assessed and acceptance was measured. Clinical parameters were assessed at baseline and after six months. Twenty-eight adolescents participated in this study (age 15.5 ± 1.4; 54% female). The standard deviation score for body mass index over all participants was 2.33 at baseline and decreased by 0.026 (95% CI −0.048 to 0.10) units, p = 0.49. Waist to height ratio was 0.596 at baseline and decreased by 0.013 (95% CI 0.0025 to 0.024), p = 0.023. Participation within the first two months ranged from 65% to 75%, but fell to 15% within the last three months. Attendance in the intervention group was 14% (95% CI −8 to 37), p = 0.18, higher than the control group. Overall program content was rated as “good” by participants, although high drop-out rates were observed. Summer months constitute a serious problem regarding attendance. The use of media support has to be assessed further in appropriately powered trials.

Background High-intensity interval training (HIIT) has been promoted as a time-efficient exercise strategy to improve health and fitness in children and adolescents. However, there remains little consensus in the literature regarding its efficacy in children and adolescents with special educational needs (SEN). This study aimed to examine HIIT as a means of improving key health and fitness parameters in children and adolescents with SEN. Methods A systematic search was conducted on eight databases (MEDLINE, Embase, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science, Scopus, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library). Studies were eligible if they 1) included an HIIT protocol, 2) examined parameters related to both physical and mental aspects of health and fitness, and 3) examined children and adolescents with SEN aged 5–17 years. Results Of the 1727 studies yielded by the database search, 13 (453 participants) were included and reviewed. We found that HIIT generally improved body composition, physical fitness, and cardiometabolic risk biomarkers across a spectrum of SEN (e.g., attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, cerebral palsy, developmental coordination disorder, and mental illness). Improvements in mental health and cognitive performance following HIIT have also been observed. Conclusion This review provides up-to-date evidence for HIIT as a viable exercise strategy for children and adolescents with SEN. Further research investigating the benefits of HIIT in a wider range of SEN populations is warranted. Trial registration This study was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Review (PROSPERO; registration number CRD42022352696).

ObjectiveHigh-intensity interval training (HIIT) has been shown to improve cardiovascular health and physical fitness in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, patient perspectives on this type of exercise remain insufficiently explored. The aim of this study was to describe experiences of supervised HIIT among patients with RA and to elucidate how patients maintain exercise on their own after completing the supervised intervention.DesignA qualitative study based on semistructured in-depth individual interviews analysed using qualitative content analysis.ParticipantsPatients were recruited from a multicentre randomised controlled trial in Western Sweden. Twenty patients (16 women) with RA who had participated in the high-intensity exercise programme for 12 weeks were included in this qualitative interview study.SettingThe supervised HIIT was conducted in a hospital setting.ResultsThe results were divided into two domains, corresponding to the two broad open-ended questions. The first domain comprises four categories: (1) challenging and effective with HIIT, (2) belonging to a group facilitates exercise, (3) feeling confident when exercising and (4) stimulating to feel the effect of exercise on the body. The second domain comprises two themes: (1) taking responsibility for one’s health and (2) a feeling of resignation.ConclusionHITT was perceived as challenging yet manageable. Follow-up visits with a knowledgeable physiotherapist were requested, since exercise was perceived as a lifelong treatment and just as crucial as pharmacological treatment. Most patients described taking responsibility for their health and maintaining their exercise regime after the supervised intervention; however, some expressed a feeling of resignation and were unready for lifestyle changes. Nevertheless, having RA can be a motivator when exercise is viewed as an important part of medical treatment.

PurposeThis review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) compared to usual care (UC) or moderate-intensity training (MIE) on physical fitness and health-related outcomes in cancer patients across all stages of therapy and aftercare.MethodsDatabases were systematically searched in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines until October 4th, 2018. Eligibility criteria included adult patients of various cancer types, performing HIIT vs. UC or MIE. Outcomes of interest included physical fitness (cardiorespiratory fitness [VO2peak] and functional capacity) and health-related outcomes (body composition, quality of life, cancer-related fatigue, and blood-borne biomarkers). Mean differences (MD) were calculated and pooled to generate effect sizes for VO2peak.ResultsThe search identified 1453 studies, out of which 12 articles were included. The average duration of interventions was 6.7 ± 3.0 weeks, with 2.8 ± 0.5 sessions per week. The meta-analysis for VO2peak showed superiority of HIIT compared to UC (MD 3.73; 95% CI 2.07, 5.39; p < 0.001) but not MIE (MD 1.36; 95% CI − 1.62, 4.35; p = 0.370). Similarly, no superior effects of HIIT compared to MIE were found for quality of life or changes in lean mass, while evidence was provided for a larger reduction in fat mass.ConclusionThis systematic review showed that short-term HIIT induces similar positive effects on physical fitness and health-related outcomes as MIE but seems to be superior compared to UC. Thus, HIIT might be a time-efficient intervention for cancer patients across all stages of therapy and aftercare.Implications for Cancer SurvivorsHigh-intensity interval training (HIIT) is superior compared to usucal care in improving physical fitness and health-related outcomes in cancer patients across all stages of therapy and aftercare. Currently, there is no evidence for the benefits of HIIT compared to aerobic training of moderate intensity (MIE) for changes in cardiorespiratory fitness, lean mass and patient-reported outcomes. Reductions in fat mass may be more pronounced in HIIT compared to MIE when training is performed in aftercare.

Background: Exercise has beneficial effects on older adults, but controversy surrounds the purported “compensatory effects” that training may have on total daily physical activity and energy expenditure in the elderly. We wanted to determine whether 8 weeks of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) induced such effects on physical activity and energy expenditure in healthy, active older adult men. Methods: Twenty-four healthy elderly male volunteers were randomized to two groups. The experimental group performed HIIT (7 × 2 min cycling repetitions, 3 d/w); the control group performed continuous moderate-intensity training (20–30 min cycling, 3 d/w). Physical activity and energy expenditure were measured with a multisensor activity monitor SenseWear Armband Mini. Results: During HIIT, significant changes were observed in moderate and vigorous physical activity, average daily metabolic equivalents (METs), physical activity level, and activity energy expenditure (p < 0.05) but not in total energy expenditure. Sleep and sedentary time, and levels of light physical activity remained constant during the training period. Conclusions: The findings suggest that HIIT induced no compensatory effect: HIIT does not adversely affect lifestyle, as it does not reduce daily energy expenditure and/or increase sedentary time.