School of Physical Education and Sports Science, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Department of Physical Education, Kunsan National University, Gunsan, South Korea.
PeerJ. 2024 Mar 14;12:e17064. doi: 10.7717/peerj.17064. eCollection 2024.
Although aerobic exercise is the primary modality recommended for the treatment of hypertension, it remains unclear whether high-intensity all-out sprint interval training (SIT) can result in greater reductions of blood pressure (BP) and cardiorespiratory health. This systematic review aims to compare the impact of SIT Moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) on improvements in resting systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and maximal oxygen uptake (VO max) among adults.
We conducted a systematic search of three online databases (PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science) from January 2000 to July 2023 to identify randomized controlled trials that compared the chronic effects of SIT MICT on BP in participants with high or normal blood pressure. We extracted information on participant characteristics, exercise protocols, BP outcomes, and intervention settings. Furthermore, the changes in VO max between the two groups were analyzed using a meta-analysis. The pooled results were presented as weighted means with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
Out of the 1,874 studies initially were found, eight were included in this review, totaling 169 participants. A significant decrease in SBP (MD = -2.82 mmHg, 95% CI [-4.53 to -1.10], = 0.08, =45%) was observed in the SIT group compared to before the training, but no significant decrease in DBP (MD = -0.75 mmHg, 95% CI [-1.92 to 0.42], = 0.16, = 33%) was observed. In contrast, both SBP (MD = -3.00 mmHg, 95% CI [-5.31 to -0.69], = 0.68, = 0%) and DBP (MD = -2.11 mmHg, 95% CI [-3.63 to -0.60], = 0.72, = 0%) significantly decreased in the MICT group with low heterogeneity. No significant difference was found in resting SBP and DBP between SIT and MICT after the intervention. Both SIT and MICT significantly increased VO peak, with SIT resulting in a mean difference (MD) of 1.75 mL/kg/min (95% CI [0.39-3.10], = 0.02, = 61%), and MICT resulting in a mean difference of 3.10 mL/kg/min (95% CI [1.03-5.18], = 0.007, = 69%). MICT was more effective in improving VO peak (MD = -1.36 mL/kg/min, 95% CI [-2.31 to 0.40], = 0.56, = 0%). Subgroup analysis of duration and single sprint time showed that SIT was more effective in reducing SBP when the duration was ≥8 weeks or when the sprint time was <30 s.
Our meta-analysis showed that SIT is an effective intervention in reducing BP and improving cardiorespiratory fitness among adults. Consequently, SIT can be used in combination with traditional MICT to increase the variety, utility, and time efficiency of exercise prescriptions for different populations.
尽管有氧运动是治疗高血压的主要推荐方式，但高强度全力冲刺间歇训练（SIT）是否能带来更大幅度的血压（BP）和心肺健康改善仍不清楚。本系统综述旨在比较 SIT 和中等强度持续训练（MICT）对改善成年人静息收缩压（SBP）、舒张压（DBP）和最大摄氧量（VO max）的影响。
我们从 2000 年 1 月至 2023 年 7 月对三个在线数据库（PubMed、Embase 和 Web of Science）进行了系统检索，以确定比较 SIT 和 MICT 对高血压或正常血压成年人慢性血压影响的随机对照试验。我们提取了参与者特征、运动方案、BP 结果和干预设置信息。此外，使用荟萃分析分析了两组之间 VO max 的变化。汇总结果以 95%置信区间（CI）表示的加权平均值呈现。
最初发现的 1874 项研究中，有 8 项研究被纳入本综述，共纳入 169 名参与者。与训练前相比，SIT 组的 SBP 显著下降（MD = -2.82 mmHg，95%CI [-4.53 至 -1.10]， = 0.08， = 45%），但 DBP 无显著下降（MD = -0.75 mmHg，95%CI [-1.92 至 0.42]， = 0.16， = 33%）。相比之下，SBP（MD = -3.00 mmHg，95%CI [-5.31 至 -0.69]， = 0.68， = 0%）和 DBP（MD = -2.11 mmHg，95%CI [-3.63 至 -0.60]， = 0.72， = 0%）在 MICT 组均显著下降，异质性较低。干预后，SIT 和 MICT 组的静息 SBP 和 DBP 之间无显著差异。SIT 和 MICT 均显著增加 VO peak，SIT 组平均差异（MD）为 1.75 mL/kg/min（95%CI [0.39-3.10]， = 0.02， = 61%），MICT 组平均差异为 3.10 mL/kg/min（95%CI [1.03-5.18]， = 0.007， = 69%）。MICT 在改善 VO peak 方面更有效（MD = -1.36 mL/kg/min，95%CI [-2.31 至 0.40]， = 0.56， = 0%）。时长和单次冲刺时间的亚组分析表明，当时长≥8 周或冲刺时间＜30 s 时，SIT 降低 SBP 更有效。
本荟萃分析表明，SIT 是降低成年人血压和改善心肺健康的有效干预措施。因此，SIT 可与传统 MICT 结合使用，以增加不同人群运动处方的多样性、实用性和时间效率。
