Wang Yu, Jia Ningxin, Zhou Yanan, Fu Linlin, Fan Lixia, Li Bin
College of Physical Education, Shandong Normal University, Jinan, China.
Front Psychol. 2023 May 12;14:1182332. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1182332. eCollection 2023.
To compare the differences in the effects of based on remote coached high intensity interval training and combined exercise training on the physical and mental health of university students.
Sixty university students were recruited from Shandong Normal University and randomly divided into HIIT group ( = 30) and AR group ( = 30), with the HIIT group using high-intensity interval training intervention and the AR group using combined exercise (aerobic combined with resistance) training intervention for 8 weeks. Mental health indicators, fitness indicators and body composition indicators were measured at the beginning and end of the intervention.
After 8 weeks, among the mental health indicators, the results of the Symptom Self-Rating Scale (SCL-90) test showed a significant improvement in the HIIT group in terms of total score, somatization, obsessive-compulsive, interpersonal sensitivity, depression, hostility, and psychoticism ( < 0.05); the AR group showed significant improvements in psychoticism ( < 0.05). There were no significant differences between the two groups. The results of the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index scale (PSQI) showed a significant difference in sleep efficiency in the HIIT group with an inverse improvement in scores; the AR group showed no significant improvement in each test item. The results of the between-group covariance showed significant differences in sleep efficiency and hypnotic drugs in the HIIT group (p < 0.05). Among the fitness indicators, the HIIT group showed significant improvements in maximum oxygen uptake, grip strength and flexibility ( < 0.05); the AR group showed significant improvements in back muscle strength and flexibility ( < 0.05). The results of the between-group covariance showed significant improvements in maximum oxygen uptake in the HIIT group ( < 0.01). Regarding body composition indicators, there was a significant improvement in Body weight, BMI, Body fat percentage and Waist-to-hip ratio in both the HIIT and AR groups ( < 0.01). There were no significant differences between the two groups.
HIIT and combined exercise training based on remote coaching had some improvement on fitness level and body composition of university students, HIIT was more advantageous in improving aerobic endurance, and HIIT based on remote coaching may have better effect than combined exercise in mental health.
Chinese Clinical Trial Register, ChiECRCT20220149. Registered on 16 May 2022.
比较基于远程指导的高强度间歇训练和联合运动训练对大学生身心健康影响的差异。
从山东师范大学招募60名大学生,随机分为高强度间歇训练组(n = 30)和联合运动组(n = 30),高强度间歇训练组采用高强度间歇训练干预,联合运动组采用联合运动(有氧结合抗阻)训练干预,为期8周。在干预开始和结束时测量心理健康指标、体能指标和身体成分指标。
8周后,在心理健康指标方面,症状自评量表(SCL - 90)测试结果显示,高强度间歇训练组在总分、躯体化、强迫、人际敏感、抑郁、敌对和精神病性方面有显著改善(P < 0.05);联合运动组在精神病性方面有显著改善(P < 0.05)。两组之间无显著差异。匹兹堡睡眠质量指数量表(PSQI)结果显示,高强度间歇训练组在睡眠效率方面有显著差异,得分呈反向改善;联合运动组在各测试项目中无显著改善。组间协方差结果显示,高强度间歇训练组在睡眠效率和催眠药物方面有显著差异(P < 0.05)。在体能指标方面,高强度间歇训练组在最大摄氧量、握力和柔韧性方面有显著改善(P < 0.05);联合运动组在背肌力量和柔韧性方面有显著改善(P < 0.05)。组间协方差结果显示,高强度间歇训练组在最大摄氧量方面有显著改善(P < 0.01)。关于身体成分指标,高强度间歇训练组和联合运动组的体重、BMI、体脂百分比和腰臀比均有显著改善(P < 0.01)。两组之间无显著差异。
基于远程指导的高强度间歇训练和联合运动训练对大学生的体能水平和身体成分有一定改善,高强度间歇训练在提高有氧耐力方面更具优势,基于远程指导的高强度间歇训练在心理健康方面可能比联合运动训练效果更好。
中国临床试验注册中心,ChiECRCT20220149。于2022年5月16日注册。