PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: 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 versus Moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) on improvements in resting systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and maximal oxygen uptake (VO2 max) among adults.
UNASSIGNED: 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 versus 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 VO2 max between the two groups were analyzed using a meta-analysis. The pooled results were presented as weighted means with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
UNASSIGNED: 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], p = 0.08, I2 =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], p = 0.16, I2 = 33%) was observed. In contrast, both SBP (MD = -3.00 mmHg, 95% CI [-5.31 to -0.69], p = 0.68, I2 = 0%) and DBP (MD = -2.11 mmHg, 95% CI [-3.63 to -0.60], p = 0.72, I2 = 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 VO2 peak, with SIT resulting in a mean difference (MD) of 1.75 mL/kg/min (95% CI [0.39-3.10], p = 0.02, I2 = 61%), and MICT resulting in a mean difference of 3.10 mL/kg/min (95% CI [1.03-5.18], p = 0.007, I2 = 69%). MICT was more effective in improving VO2 peak (MD = -1.36 mL/kg/min, 95% CI [-2.31 to 0.40], p = 0.56, I2 = 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.
UNASSIGNED: 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.
UNASSIGNED: 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 versus 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 VO2 max between the two groups were analyzed using a meta-analysis. The pooled results were presented as weighted means with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
UNASSIGNED: 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], p = 0.08, I2 =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], p = 0.16, I2 = 33%) was observed. In contrast, both SBP (MD = -3.00 mmHg, 95% CI [-5.31 to -0.69], p = 0.68, I2 = 0%) and DBP (MD = -2.11 mmHg, 95% CI [-3.63 to -0.60], p = 0.72, I2 = 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 VO2 peak, with SIT resulting in a mean difference (MD) of 1.75 mL/kg/min (95% CI [0.39-3.10], p = 0.02, I2 = 61%), and MICT resulting in a mean difference of 3.10 mL/kg/min (95% CI [1.03-5.18], p = 0.007, I2 = 69%). MICT was more effective in improving VO2 peak (MD = -1.36 mL/kg/min, 95% CI [-2.31 to 0.40], p = 0.56, I2 = 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.
UNASSIGNED: 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.
摘要：
■尽管有氧运动是推荐用于治疗高血压的主要方式，目前尚不清楚高强度全力冲刺间歇训练(SIT)是否能更大地降低血压(BP)和心肺健康.本系统评价旨在比较SIT与中等强度连续训练（MICT）对静息收缩压（SBP）改善的影响。成人舒张压（DBP）和最大摄氧量（VO2max）。
■我们对三个在线数据库（PubMed，Embase,和WebofScience），从2000年1月至2023年7月，以确定随机对照试验，这些试验比较了SIT与MICT对高血压或正常血压参与者的BP的慢性影响。我们提取了有关参与者特征的信息，锻炼方案,血压结果，和干预设置。此外，采用荟萃分析分析两组间VO2max的变化.合并的结果以加权平均值表示，具有95%置信区间(CI)。
■在最初发现的1,874项研究中，这次审查包括八个，共169人。SBP显着下降（MD=-2.82mmHg，95%CI[-4.53至-1.10]，与训练前相比，在SIT组中观察到p=0.08，I2=45％），但DBP没有显著降低(MD=-0.75mmHg，95%CI[-1.92至0.42]，观察到p=0.16，I2=33%）。相比之下,两者均为SBP（MD=-3.00mmHg，95%CI[-5.31至-0.69]，p=0.68，I2=0%）和DBP（MD=-2.11mmHg，95%CI[-3.63至-0.60]，p=0.72，I2=0％）在具有低异质性的MICT组中显着降低。干预后SIT和MICT的静息SBP和DBP差异无统计学意义。SIT和MICT均显着提高了VO2峰值，SIT导致的平均差（MD）为1.75mL/kg/min（95％CI[0.39-3.10]，p=0.02，I2=61%），和MICT导致3.10mL/kg/min的平均差(95%CI[1.03-5.18]，p=0.007，I2=69%）。MICT在改善VO2峰值方面更有效（MD=-1.36mL/kg/min，95%CI[-2.31至0.40]，p=0.56，I2=0%）。持续时间和单次冲刺时间的亚组分析显示，当持续时间≥8周或冲刺时间<30s时，SIT在降低SBP方面更有效。
■我们的荟萃分析显示，SIT是成年人降低BP和改善心肺适应性的有效干预措施。因此,SIT可以与传统的MICT结合使用，以增加品种，实用程序，以及不同人群运动处方的时间效率。
■我们对三个在线数据库（PubMed，Embase,和WebofScience），从2000年1月至2023年7月，以确定随机对照试验，这些试验比较了SIT与MICT对高血压或正常血压参与者的BP的慢性影响。我们提取了有关参与者特征的信息，锻炼方案,血压结果，和干预设置。此外，采用荟萃分析分析两组间VO2max的变化.合并的结果以加权平均值表示，具有95%置信区间(CI)。
■在最初发现的1,874项研究中，这次审查包括八个，共169人。SBP显着下降（MD=-2.82mmHg，95%CI[-4.53至-1.10]，与训练前相比，在SIT组中观察到p=0.08，I2=45％），但DBP没有显著降低(MD=-0.75mmHg，95%CI[-1.92至0.42]，观察到p=0.16，I2=33%）。相比之下,两者均为SBP（MD=-3.00mmHg，95%CI[-5.31至-0.69]，p=0.68，I2=0%）和DBP（MD=-2.11mmHg，95%CI[-3.63至-0.60]，p=0.72，I2=0％）在具有低异质性的MICT组中显着降低。干预后SIT和MICT的静息SBP和DBP差异无统计学意义。SIT和MICT均显着提高了VO2峰值，SIT导致的平均差（MD）为1.75mL/kg/min（95％CI[0.39-3.10]，p=0.02，I2=61%），和MICT导致3.10mL/kg/min的平均差(95%CI[1.03-5.18]，p=0.007，I2=69%）。MICT在改善VO2峰值方面更有效（MD=-1.36mL/kg/min，95%CI[-2.31至0.40]，p=0.56，I2=0%）。持续时间和单次冲刺时间的亚组分析显示，当持续时间≥8周或冲刺时间<30s时，SIT在降低SBP方面更有效。
■我们的荟萃分析显示，SIT是成年人降低BP和改善心肺适应性的有效干预措施。因此,SIT可以与传统的MICT结合使用，以增加品种，实用程序，以及不同人群运动处方的时间效率。
