Suppr超能文献

运动后能量摄入:运动强度和模式重要吗?一项比较高强度间歇与中等强度持续方案的系统评价和荟萃分析。

Post-exercise energy intake: do the intensity and mode of exercise matter? A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing high-intensity interval with moderate-intensity continuous protocols.

机构信息

Exercise and Immunometabolism Research Group, Department of Physical Education, Universidade Estadual Paulista, Presidente Prudente, São Paulo, Brazil.

High-intensity Intermittent Exercise Physiology Research Group; Department of Sport, School of Physical Education and Sport, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.

出版信息

Eur J Clin Nutr. 2022 Jul;76(7):929-942. doi: 10.1038/s41430-021-01026-w. Epub 2021 Oct 21.

Abstract

The present systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the impact of exercise intensity and mode (high-intensity interval exercise-HIIE or sprint interval exercise-SIE versus moderate-intensity continuous exercise-MICE) on post-exercise ad libitum energy intake. The studies were required to have at least two exercise conditions (HIIE or SIE vs MICE). Overall, 642 manuscripts were initially identified and 17 met the eligibility criteria. The random effect meta-analysis did not reveal differences for absolute energy intake (28 pairwise comparisons) between HIIE (p = 0.54; 95% Confidence Interval - CI: -0.14 to 0.26; 22 pairwise comparisons) or SIE (p = 0.08; 95% CI -0.65 to 0.03; 6 pairwise comparisons) versus MICE, neither for relative energy intake (p = 0.97; 95% CI: -0.35 to 0.10 for HIIE; p = 0.28; 95% CI: -1.03 to 0.06 for SIE) with five and one pairwise comparisons, respectively. Subgroup analyses for methods to evaluate ad libitum energy intake, body mass, sex, volume, and timing of exercise were non-significant. Inspecting each study, two pairwise comparisons reported lower post-exercise absolute energy intake in HIIE compared to control (CRTL), and three pairwise comparisons reported lower absolute energy intake after SIE compared to MICE. None pairwise comparison reported differences between protocols (HIIE or SIE versus MICE) for relative energy intake. In conclusion, the meta-analysis did not show differences between protocols for absolute and relative energy intake; five pairwise comparisons from 28 demonstrated lower absolute energy intake in HIIE or SIE compared to CRTL or MICE. Further studies are needed to address the key relevant variables in which exercise intensity and mode may impact energy intake.

摘要

本系统评价和荟萃分析旨在比较运动强度和模式(高强度间歇运动-HIIE 或冲刺间歇运动-SIE 与中等强度持续运动-MICE)对运动后随意能量摄入的影响。研究必须至少有两种运动条件(HIIE 或 SIE 与 MICE)。总的来说,最初确定了 642 篇论文,其中 17 篇符合入选标准。随机效应荟萃分析显示,HIIE(p = 0.54;95%置信区间- CI:-0.14 至 0.26;22 对比较)或 SIE(p = 0.08;95% CI:-0.65 至 0.03;6 对比较)与 MICE 之间的绝对能量摄入(28 对比较)无差异,也不存在相对能量摄入(p = 0.97;95% CI:-0.35 至 0.10 用于 HIIE;p = 0.28;95% CI:-1.03 至 0.06 用于 SIE),分别有 5 对和 1 对比较。用于评估随意能量摄入的方法、体重、性别、运动量和运动时间的亚组分析无显著性差异。检查每项研究,有两项配对比较报告 HIIE 后绝对能量摄入低于对照(CRTL),有三项配对比较报告 SIE 后绝对能量摄入低于 MICE。没有任何配对比较报告协议(HIIE 或 SIE 与 MICE)之间的相对能量摄入存在差异。总之,荟萃分析并未显示协议之间在绝对和相对能量摄入方面存在差异;28 项配对比较中的 5 项显示 HIIE 或 SIE 后绝对能量摄入低于 CRTL 或 MICE。需要进一步的研究来解决运动强度和模式可能影响能量摄入的关键相关变量。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验