慢性下腰痛患者中12周高强度间歇训练与中等强度持续训练的比较：一项随机单盲可行性研究
12 weeks high intensity interval training versus moderate intensity continuous training in chronic low back pain subjects: a randomised single-blinded feasibility study.
作者信息
Cerini Tamara, Hilfiker Roger, Riegler Thomas F, Felsch Quinten T M
机构信息
Department of Physiotherapy, Schulthess Klinik, Zurich, Switzerland.
Department of Physiotherapy, University of Applied Sciences and Arts Western Switzerland Valais (HES-SO Valais-Wallis), Leukerbad, Switzerland.
出版信息
Arch Physiother. 2022 May 2;12(1):12. doi: 10.1186/s40945-022-00136-3.
BACKGROUND
Currently, very little is known about the effects of an endurance high intensity interval training (HIIT) in chronic low back pain patients. Therefore, the feasibility and safety of the HIIT must be assessed first before Currently, very little is known about the effects of an endurance high intensity interval training in chronic low back pain patients. Therefore, the feasibility and safety of the HIIT has to be assessed first before it can be integrated safely into research and daily practice it can be integrated safely into research and daily practice. This study aims to answers the question if high intensity interval training and moderate intensity continuous training (MICT) have comparable adherence and feasibility.
METHODS
Participants (age from 29 to 69 years) with non-specific chronic low back pain were recruited in this randomised, single-blinded, allocation concealed, feasibility study. The participants trained 30 min on a cycle ergometer for 12 weeks. One group had HIIT and the other MICT.
RESULTS
Of 45 screened subjects 30 participated. The adherence rate was 94% in the HIIT group (median 0.94, IQR 0.23) versus 96% in the MICT group (median 0.96, IQR 0.08), without between-group differences: estimated median of the difference of - 0,01 [95% CI, - 0.11 to 0.06; p = 0.76]. Similar results in enjoyability (median 3, IQR 1 vs median 2, IQR 1.8) and willingness to continue the training (median 3, IQR 1 vs median 3, IQR 0.4). Both groups improved in pain and disability, without between-group differences in pain [median of the difference, 0.5; 95% CI, - 1 to 2; p = 0.95] nor in disability [median of the difference, 1.78; 95% CI, - 6.44 to 9.56; p = 0.64].
CONCLUSION
There were no differences in adherence rates. HIIT is as feasible as MICT in non-specific chronic low back pain and can be used in future larger trials to deepen the knowledge about HIIT in this specific population.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04055545 . Registered 13 August 2019.
背景
目前，对于耐力高强度间歇训练（HIIT）对慢性下腰痛患者的影响知之甚少。因此，在将HIIT安全地纳入研究和日常实践之前，必须首先评估其可行性和安全性。本研究旨在回答高强度间歇训练和中等强度持续训练（MICT）是否具有可比的依从性和可行性这一问题。
方法
在这项随机、单盲、分配隐藏的可行性研究中，招募了患有非特异性慢性下腰痛的参与者（年龄在29至69岁之间）。参与者在自行车测力计上训练30分钟，为期12周。一组进行HIIT，另一组进行MICT。
结果
在45名筛查对象中，30名参与了研究。HIIT组的依从率为94%（中位数0.94，四分位间距0.23），而MICT组为96%（中位数0.96，四分位间距0.08），组间无差异：差异的估计中位数为 -0.01 [95%可信区间，-0.11至0.06；p = 0.76]。在趣味性（中位数3，四分位间距1对比中位数2，四分位间距1.8）和继续训练的意愿（中位数3，四分位间距1对比中位数3，四分位间距0.4）方面也有类似结果。两组在疼痛和功能障碍方面均有改善，组间在疼痛方面无差异[差异的中位数，0.5；95%可信区间，-1至2；p = 0.95]，在功能障碍方面也无差异[差异的中位数，1.78；95%可信区间，-6.44至9.56；p = 0.64]。
结论
依从率无差异。在非特异性慢性下腰痛患者中，HIIT与MICT一样可行，可用于未来更大规模的试验，以加深对该特定人群中HIIT的了解。
试验注册
ClinicalTrials.gov，NCT04055545。2019年8月13日注册。
Zotero 插件