Center for General Education, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Graduate Institute of Sports Science, National Taiwan Sport University, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Int J Med Sci. 2024 Jun 24;21(9):1689-1700. doi: 10.7150/ijms.96073. eCollection 2024.
There is evidence that aging and obesity are associated with increased oxidative stress and chronic inflammation. High-intensity interval training (HIIT) may be superior to moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) in anti-inflammatory and anti-obesity benefits. Therefore, the objective of this study is to determine which HIIT prescriptions will be more effective in reducing fat accumulation, inflammation, and improving metabolic adaptation and exercise performance in middle-aged and older overweight adults. Thirty-six middle-aged with overweight adults were divided into one of three groups: 1. L-HIIT group: the long-interval HIIT group (4 × 4 min Exercise/4 min Rest), 2. M-HIIT group: the medium-interval HIIT group (8 × 2 min Exercise/2 min Rest), 3. Control group: no exercise training intervention. All groups underwent the training stage for eight weeks (three sessions per week), followed by a detraining stage of four weeks in order to investigate the effects induced by different HIIT interventions on inflammation, metabolic adaptation, anti-fatigue and exercise performance, and fat loss There was a significant physiological response in the change rate of heart rate (HR) after an acute L-HIIT session compared with an acute M-HIIT session (ΔHR: ↑49.66±16.09% vs ↑33.22±14.37%, =0.02); furthermore, systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) decreased significantly following a single L-HIIT session. After an eight-week training stage, the L-HIIT and M-HIIT groups exhibited a significant increase in aerobic capacity (ΔVO), with values of +27.93±16.79% (<0.001) and +18.39±8.12% (<0.001), respectively, in comparison to the control group. Furthermore, in the L-HIIT group, the anaerobic power of relative mean power (RMP) exhibited a significant increase (=0.019). However, following a four-week detraining stage, the adiponectin concentration remained 1.78 times higher in the L-HIIT group than in the control group (=0.033). The results of blood sugar, blood lipids, body composition, and inflammatory markers did not indicate any improved it did not indicate any improvements from the two different HIIT protocols. The results indicate that an eight-week L-HIIT or M-HIIT intervention (three sessions per week, 32 minutes per session) may be an effective approach for improving aerobic capacity. It can be posited that L-HIIT may be a more advantageous mode than M-HIIT for enhancing anaerobic power, adipokine levels, and improving blood pressure in an aged and overweight population due to the induced physiological responses.
有证据表明，衰老和肥胖与氧化应激和慢性炎症的增加有关。高强度间歇训练（HIIT）在抗炎和抗肥胖方面可能优于中等强度持续训练（MICT）。因此，本研究的目的是确定哪种 HIIT 处方更能有效减少脂肪堆积、炎症，改善中年和超重成年人的代谢适应和运动表现。
36 名超重的中年人被分为三组之一：1. L-HIIT 组：长间歇 HIIT 组（4×4 分钟运动/4 分钟休息），2. M-HIIT 组：中间歇 HIIT 组（8×2 分钟运动/2 分钟休息），3. 对照组：无运动训练干预。所有组均进行 8 周的训练阶段（每周 3 次），然后进行 4 周的脱训阶段，以研究不同 HIIT 干预对炎症、代谢适应、抗疲劳和运动表现以及脂肪损失的影响。
与急性 M-HIIT 相比，急性 L-HIIT 后心率（HR）的变化率有显著的生理反应（ΔHR：↑49.66±16.09% vs ↑33.22±14.37%，=0.02）；此外，单次 L-HIIT 后收缩压（SBP）和舒张压（DBP）明显下降。
经过 8 周的训练阶段，L-HIIT 和 M-HIIT 组的有氧能力显著增加，分别为+27.93±16.79%（<0.001）和+18.39±8.12%（<0.001），而对照组则没有。此外，在 L-HIIT 组，相对平均功率（RMP）的无氧功率显著增加（=0.019）。然而，在 4 周的脱训阶段后，L-HIIT 组的脂联素浓度仍比对照组高 1.78 倍（=0.033）。血糖、血脂、身体成分和炎症标志物的结果没有显示出任何改善。
结果表明，八周的 L-HIIT 或 M-HIIT 干预（每周三次，每次 32 分钟）可能是改善有氧能力的有效方法。由于诱导的生理反应，L-HIIT 可能比 M-HIIT 更有利于增强肥胖人群的无氧能力、脂联素水平和降低血压。
