Suppr超能文献

高强度间歇训练与中等强度持续训练对改善健康与疾病中心血管代谢风险因素的效果比较:一项荟萃分析。

Effectiveness of HIIE versus MICT in Improving Cardiometabolic Risk Factors in Health and Disease: A Meta-analysis.

机构信息

Sports Medicine Department, University Hospital of Tübingen, Tübingen, GERMANY.

Clinical Epidemiology and Applied Biometrics Department, University Hospital of Tübingen, Tübingen, GERMANY.

出版信息

Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2021 Mar 1;53(3):559-573. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000002506.

Abstract

PURPOSE

We aimed to investigate differences between high-intensity interval exercise (HIIE, including high-intensity interval training and sprint interval training) and moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) on physical fitness, body composition, blood pressure, blood lipids, insulin and glucose metabolism, inflammation, and endothelial function.

METHODS

Differences between HIIE and MICT were summarized using a random-effects meta-analysis on the effect size (Cohen's d). A meta-regression was conducted using the following subgroups: population, age, training duration, men ratio, exercise type, baseline values (clinical relevant ranges), and type of HIIE. Studies were included if at least one of the following outcomes were reported: maximal oxygen uptake (V˙O2max), flow-mediated dilation (FMD), body mass index (BMI), body mass, percent body fat, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, high-density lipoprotein (HDL), low-density lipoprotein (LDL), triglycerides, total cholesterol, C-reactive protein (CRP), fasting glucose and insulin, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), and insulin resistance (HOMA-IR). A total of 55 studies were included.

RESULTS

Overall, HIIE was superior to MICT in improving V˙O2max (d = 0.40, P < 0.001) and FMD (d = 0.54, P < 0.05). Oppositely, MICT was superior to HIIE in improving HbA1c (d = -0.27, P < 0.05). No differences were observed in BMI (d = -0.02), body mass (d = -0.05), percent body fat (d = 0.04), systolic blood pressure (d = -0.04), diastolic blood pressure (d = 0.03), HDL (d = -0.05), LDL (d = 0.08), triglycerides (d = 0.03), total cholesterol (d = 0.14), CRP (d = -0.11), fasting insulin (d = 0.02), fasting glucose (d = 0.02), and HOMA-IR (d = -0.04). Moderator analyses indicated that the difference between HIIE and MICT was affected by different subgroups.

CONCLUSION

Overall, HIIE showed to be more effective in improving cardiovascular health and cardiorespiratory fitness, whereas MICT was superior in improving long-term glucose metabolism. In the process of personalized training counseling, health-enhancing effects of exercise training may be improved by considering the individual risk profiles.

摘要

目的

我们旨在研究高强度间歇训练(HIIE,包括高强度间歇训练和冲刺间歇训练)与中等强度持续训练(MICT)在身体适应性、身体成分、血压、血脂、胰岛素和葡萄糖代谢、炎症和内皮功能方面的差异。

方法

使用随机效应荟萃分析对效应大小(Cohen's d)进行总结,以比较 HIIE 和 MICT 之间的差异。使用以下亚组进行荟萃回归分析:人群、年龄、训练持续时间、男性比例、运动类型、基线值(临床相关范围)和 HIIE 类型。如果至少报告了以下结果之一,则纳入研究:最大摄氧量(V˙O2max)、血流介导的扩张(FMD)、体重指数(BMI)、体重、体脂百分比、收缩压和舒张压、高密度脂蛋白(HDL)、低密度脂蛋白(LDL)、甘油三酯、总胆固醇、C 反应蛋白(CRP)、空腹血糖和胰岛素、糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)和胰岛素抵抗(HOMA-IR)。共纳入 55 项研究。

结果

总体而言,HIIE 在提高 V˙O2max(d = 0.40,P < 0.001)和 FMD(d = 0.54,P < 0.05)方面优于 MICT。相反,MICT 在改善 HbA1c 方面优于 HIIE(d = -0.27,P < 0.05)。BMI(d = -0.02)、体重(d = -0.05)、体脂百分比(d = 0.04)、收缩压(d = -0.04)、舒张压(d = -0.03)、高密度脂蛋白(d = -0.05)、低密度脂蛋白(d = -0.08)、甘油三酯(d = -0.03)、总胆固醇(d = 0.14)、CRP(d = -0.11)、空腹胰岛素(d = 0.02)、空腹血糖(d = 0.02)和 HOMA-IR(d = -0.04)方面无差异。亚组分析表明,HIIE 和 MICT 之间的差异受不同亚组的影响。

结论

总体而言,HIIE 在改善心血管健康和心肺适应性方面表现更为出色,而 MICT 在改善长期葡萄糖代谢方面则更为优越。在个性化训练咨询过程中,通过考虑个体的健康风险状况,可以提高运动训练的健康促进效果。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验