Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

High-intensity interval training in cardiac rehabilitation: a multi-centre randomized controlled trial

  • Gordon McGregor*
  • , Richard Powell
  • , Brian Begg
  • , Stefan T Birkett
  • , Simon Nichols
  • , Stuart Ennis
  • , Scott McGuire
  • , Jonathon Prosser
  • , Olivier Fiassam
  • , Siew Wan Hee
  • , Thomas Hamborg
  • , Prithwish Banerjee
  • , Ned Hartfiel
  • , Joanna M Charles
  • , Rhiannon T Edwards
  • , Aimee Drane
  • , Danish Ali
  • , Faizel Osman
  • , Hejie He
  • , Tom Lachlan
  • Mark J. Haykowsky, Lee Ingle, Rob Shave
*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

47 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background: There is a lack of international consensus regarding the prescription of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) for people with coronary artery disease (CAD) attending cardiac rehabilitation (CR).

Aims: To assess the clinical effectiveness and safety of low-volume HIIT compared with moderate-intensity steady-state (MISS) exercise training for people with CAD.

Methods and results: We conducted a multi-centre RCT, recruiting 382 patients from 6 outpatient CR centres. Participants were randomized to twice-weekly HIIT (n = 187) or MISS (n = 195) for 8 weeks. HIIT consisted of 10 × 1 min intervals of vigorous exercise (>85% maximum capacity) interspersed with 1 min periods of recovery. MISS was 20–40 min of moderate-intensity continuous exercise (60–80% maximum capacity). The primary outcome was the change in cardiorespiratory fitness [peak oxygen uptake (VO2 peak)] at 8 week follow-up. Secondary outcomes included cardiovascular disease risk markers, cardiac structure and function, adverse events, and health-related quality of life. At 8 weeks, VO2 peak improved more with HIIT (2.37 mL.kg−1.min−1; SD, 3.11) compared with MISS (1.32 mL.kg−1.min−1; SD, 2.66). After adjusting for age, sex, and study site, the difference between arms was 1.04 mL.kg−1.min−1 (95% CI, 0.38 to 1.69; P = 0.002). Only one serious adverse event was possibly related to HIIT.

Conclusions: In stable CAD, low-volume HIIT improved cardiorespiratory fitness more than MISS by a clinically meaningful margin. Low-volume HIIT is a safe, well-tolerated, and clinically effective intervention that produces short-term improvement in cardiorespiratory fitness. It should be considered by all CR programmes as an adjunct or alternative to MISS.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02784873. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02784873.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)745-755
Number of pages11
JournalEuropean Journal of Preventive Cardiology
Volume30
Issue number9
Early online date8 Feb 2023
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jul 2023

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Keywords

  • Cardiac rehabilitation
  • Cardiorespiratory fitness
  • Coronary artery disease
  • Exercise training
  • High-intensity interval training
  • National Health Service

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Epidemiology
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'High-intensity interval training in cardiac rehabilitation: a multi-centre randomized controlled trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this