Ramírez-Vélez Robinson, Tordecilla-Sanders Alejandra, Téllez-T Luis Andrés, Camelo-Prieto Diana, Hernández-Quiñonez Paula Andrea, Correa-Bautista Jorge Enrique, Garcia-Hermoso Antonio, Ramirez-Campillo Rodrigo, Izquierdo Mikel
Centro de Estudios para la Medición de la Actividad Física « CEMA», Escuela de Medicina y Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad del Rosario, Bogotá D.C, Colombia.
Grupo GICAEDS, Facultad de Cultura Física, Deporte y Recreación, Universidad Santo Tomás, Bogotá D.C, Colombia.
J Transl Med. 2017 May 30;15(1):118. doi: 10.1186/s12967-017-1216-6.
Metabolic syndrome (MetS) increases the risk of morbidity and mortality from cardiovascular disease, and exercise training is an important factor in the treatment and prevention of the clinical components of MetS.
The aim was to compare the effects of high-intensity interval training and steady-state moderate-intensity training on clinical components of MetS in healthy physically inactive adults.
Twenty adults were randomly allocated to receive either moderate-intensity continuous training [MCT group; 60-80% heart rate reserve (HRR)] or high-intensity interval training (HIT group; 4 × 4 min at 85-95% peak HRR interspersed with 4 min of active rest at 65% peak HRR). We used the revised International Diabetes Federation criteria for MetS. A MetS Z-score was calculated for each individual and each component of the MetS.
In intent-to-treat analyses, the changes in MetS Z-score were 1.546 (1.575) in the MCT group and -1.249 (1.629) in the HIT group (between-groups difference, P = 0.001). The average number of cardiometabolic risk factors changed in the MCT group (-0.133, P = 0.040) but not in the HIT group (0.018, P = 0.294), with no difference between groups (P = 0.277).
Among apparently healthy physically inactive adults, HIT and MCT offer similar cardiometabolic protection against single MetS risk factors but differ in their effect on average risk factors per subject. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02738385 registered on March 23, 2016.
代谢综合征(MetS)增加了心血管疾病发病和死亡的风险,而运动训练是治疗和预防MetS临床症状的重要因素。
比较高强度间歇训练和稳态中等强度训练对健康但缺乏运动的成年人MetS临床症状的影响。
20名成年人被随机分配接受中等强度持续训练[MCT组;心率储备(HRR)的60-80%]或高强度间歇训练(HIT组;以85-95%的心率峰值进行4×4分钟训练,中间穿插4分钟以65%心率峰值进行的主动休息)。我们使用修订后的国际糖尿病联盟MetS标准。为每个个体和MetS的每个组成部分计算MetS Z评分。
在意向性分析中,MCT组MetS Z评分的变化为1.546(1.575),HIT组为-1.249(1.629)(组间差异,P = 0.001)。MCT组心血管代谢危险因素的平均数量发生了变化(-0.133,P = 0.040),而HIT组没有变化(0.018,P = 0.294),两组之间没有差异(P = 0.277)。
在明显健康但缺乏运动的成年人中,HIT和MCT对单一MetS危险因素提供相似的心血管代谢保护,但对每个受试者的平均危险因素的影响不同。试验注册ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02738385,于2016年3月23日注册。