University Institute of Sports Medicine, Prevention and Rehabilitation, Paracelsus Medical University of Salzburg, Austria.
University Institute of Sports Medicine, Prevention and Rehabilitation, Paracelsus Medical University of Salzburg, Austria
Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2016 Jan;23(1):14-20. doi: 10.1177/2047487314560100. Epub 2014 Nov 17.
High-intensity interval training has recently emerged as superior to continuous endurance training in cardiac rehabilitation upon other training regimes. Individually tailored continuous endurance training and pyramid training could induce comparable effects on peak work capacity as high intensity interval training.
A prospective, randomized study.
Effects of the following isocaloric cycle ergometer protocols on peak work capacity have been assessed in patients with coronary artery disease (n = 60) during 6 weeks of outpatient cardiac rehabilitation, i.e. 18 supervised sessions of exercise training: (1) continuous endurance training (n = 20): 33 min at 65-85% peak heart rate; (2) high intensity interval training (n = 20): 4 × 4 min intervals at 85-95% peak heart rate, each followed by 3 min of active recovery at 60-70% peak heart rate; (3) pyramid training (n = 20): 3 × 8 min of stepwise load increase and subsequent decrease from 65-95-65% peak heart rate, supplemented by 2 min recovery at 60-70% peak heart rate between pyramids. All protocols were preceded by 5 min of warm-up and followed by 5 min cool-down at 60-70% peak heart rate.
Attendance during exercise sessions was 99.2%. There were significant increases in peak work capacity of comparable magnitude in all three training groups (begin vs. end: continuous endurance training: 136.0 ± 49.6 W vs. 163.4 ± 60.8 W (21.1 ± 8.5%); high-intensity interval training: 141.0 ± 60.4 W vs. 171.1 ± 69.8 W (22.8 ± 6.6%); pyramid training: 128.7 ± 50.6 W vs. 158.5 ± 57.9 W (24.8 ± 10.8%); within groups all p < 0.001; between groups, p = not significant).
Endurance training protocols assessed in this study all led to significant increases in peak work capacity of comparable magnitude. Our findings suggest that these protocols can be used interchangeably, which will lead to further individualization of exercise prescription and may therefore result in improved adherence to lifelong behavioural changes.
高强度间歇训练(High-intensity interval training,HIIT)在其他训练方案中,已经优于持续耐力训练(continuous endurance training,CET)成为心脏康复的首选。个体化定制的持续耐力训练和金字塔训练(Pyramid training)可以诱导与高强度间歇训练相当的峰值工作能力。
前瞻性、随机研究。
在 6 周的门诊心脏康复期间,评估了冠心病患者(n=60)进行以下等热量的功率自行车运动方案对峰值工作能力的影响,即 18 次监督运动训练:(1)持续耐力训练(CET)(n=20):在 65-85%峰值心率下持续 33 分钟;(2)高强度间歇训练(HIIT)(n=20):在 85-95%峰值心率下进行 4×4 分钟的间隔,每个间隔后进行 3 分钟的主动恢复,恢复心率为 60-70%峰值心率;(3)金字塔训练(n=20):3×8 分钟的逐步增加负荷,随后从 65-95-65%峰值心率下降,在金字塔之间用 2 分钟的恢复时间来补充,恢复心率为 60-70%峰值心率。所有方案均在 5 分钟的热身运动后开始,在 60-70%峰值心率下进行 5 分钟的冷却运动。
运动训练中,出席率为 99.2%。在所有三组训练中,峰值工作能力都有显著的同等程度的增加(起始 vs. 结束:持续耐力训练:136.0±49.6 W vs. 163.4±60.8 W(21.1±8.5%);高强度间歇训练:141.0±60.4 W vs. 171.1±69.8 W(22.8±6.6%);金字塔训练:128.7±50.6 W vs. 158.5±57.9 W(24.8±10.8%);组内所有 p<0.001;组间,p=无显著差异)。
本研究评估的耐力训练方案均导致峰值工作能力显著增加,且增加幅度相当。我们的研究结果表明,这些方案可以互换使用,这将进一步实现运动处方的个体化,从而可能提高对终生行为改变的依从性。