Effects of high-intensity interval training compared to moderate-intensity continuous training on maximal oxygen consumption and blood pressure in healthy men: A randomized controlled trial

• Published in: Biomédica
• Main Authors: Víctor Hugo Arboleda-Serna, Yuri Feito, Fredy Alonso Patiño-Villada, Astrid Viviana Vargas-Romero, Elkin Fernando Arango-Vélez
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English; Spanish
• Published: Instituto Nacional de Salud 2019
• Subjects: High-intensity interval training; blood pressure; exercise; cardiorespiratory fitness; randomized controlled trial; Medicine; R; Arctic medicine. Tropical medicine; RC955-962; Arctic
• Online Access: https://doi.org/10.7705/biomedica.4451; https://doaj.org/article/f4df84a99b604f6cade14251faeed2a2

Introduction: Aerobic exercise generates increased cardiorespiratory fitness, which results in a protective factor for cardiovascular disease. High-intensity interval training (HIIT) might produce higher increases on cardiorespiratory fitness in comparison with moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT); however, current evidence is not conclusive. Objective: To compare the effects of a low-volume HIIT and a MICT on maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max), systolic blood pressure, and diastolic blood pressure during eight weeks in healthy men between 18 and 44 years of age. Materials and methods: We conducted a randomized controlled trial. Forty-four volunteers were randomized to HIIT (n=22) or MICT (n=22). Both groups performed 24 sessions on a treadmill. The HIIT group completed 15 bouts of 30 seconds (90-95%, maximal heart rate, HRmax), while the MICT group completed 40 minutes of continuous exercise (65-75% HRmax). Results: Intra-group analysis showed an increase in VO2max of 3.5 ml/kg/min [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.02 to 4.93; p=0.0001] in HIIT and 1.9 ml/kg/min (95% CI -0.98 to 4.82; p=0.18) in MICT. However, the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant (1.01 ml/kg/min. 95% CI -2.16 to 4.18, p=0.52). MICT generated a greater reduction in systolic blood pressure compared to HIIT (median 8 mm Hg; p<0.001). No statistically significant differences were found between the groups for DBP. Conclusions: Results indicated no significant change in VO2max with a low-volume HIIT protocol versus MICT after 24 sessions. In contrast, MICT provided a greater reduction in systolic blood pressure compared to HIIT. The study is registered as a clinical trial via clinicaltrials.gov with identifier number: NCT02288403.