为期八周的高强度间歇训练与中等强度持续训练计划对久坐青少年身体成分和心脏代谢风险因素的影响

Fucheng Sun, C. A. Williams, Qiang Sun, Feng Hu, Ting Zhang
{"title":"为期八周的高强度间歇训练与中等强度持续训练计划对久坐青少年身体成分和心脏代谢风险因素的影响","authors":"Fucheng Sun, C. A. Williams, Qiang Sun, Feng Hu, Ting Zhang","doi":"10.3389/fphys.2024.1450341","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study aimed to assess and compare the effect of an 8-week high-intensity interval training (HIIT) or moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) programme on body composition and cardiovascular metabolic outcomes of sedentary adolescents in China.Eighteen sedentary normal-weight adolescents (age: 18.5 ± 0.3 years, 11 females) were randomized into three groups. HIIT group protocol consisted of three sessions/week for 8-week of “all out” sprints to reach 85%–95% of HRmax, and MICT group protocol undertook three sessions/week for 8-week of continuous running to reach 65%–75% of HRmax. The control group resumed normal daily activities without any intervention. Blood pressure and body composition were measured, and fasting blood samples were obtained at baseline and 48 h post-trial. Mixed-design ANOVA analysis was employed followed by post hoc t-tests and Bonferroni alpha-correction was used to evaluate interaction, between-group, and within-group differences, respectively.Results indicated that HIIT and MICT similarly affected body fat mass (p = 0.021, ES = 0.19; p = 0.016, ES = 0.30, respectively), body fat percentage (p = 0.037, ES = 0.17; p = 0.041, ES = 0.28, respectively), visceral fat area (p = 0.001, ES = 0.35; p = 0.003, ES = 0.49, respectively) of body composition. A positive outcome was observed for waist/hip ratio (p = 0.033, ES = 0.43) in HIIT, but not MICT (p = 0.163, ES = 0.33). No significant differences were found between groups for any clinical biomarkers. However, pairwise comparison within the group showed a significant decrease in systolic blood pressure (p = 0.018, ES = 0.84), diastolic blood pressure (p = 0.008, ES = 1.76), and triglyceride (p = 0.004, ES = 1.33) in HIIT, but no significant differences were found in the MICT and Control group.Both 8-week HIIT and MICT programmes have similar positive effects on reducing body fat mass, fat percentage, and visceral fat area. However, sedentary adolescents may have limited scope to decrease insulin resistance after these 8-week interventions. Notably, the 8-week HIIT intervention was highly effective in increasing cardiometabolic health compared to the MICT. The exercise intensity threshold value and metabolic outcomes of high-intensity interval sprints should be explored further to extend the long-term benefit in this cohort.","PeriodicalId":504973,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Physiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of eight-week high-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training programme on body composition, cardiometabolic risk factors in sedentary adolescents\",\"authors\":\"Fucheng Sun, C. A. Williams, Qiang Sun, Feng Hu, Ting Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fphys.2024.1450341\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study aimed to assess and compare the effect of an 8-week high-intensity interval training (HIIT) or moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) programme on body composition and cardiovascular metabolic outcomes of sedentary adolescents in China.Eighteen sedentary normal-weight adolescents (age: 18.5 ± 0.3 years, 11 females) were randomized into three groups. HIIT group protocol consisted of three sessions/week for 8-week of “all out” sprints to reach 85%–95% of HRmax, and MICT group protocol undertook three sessions/week for 8-week of continuous running to reach 65%–75% of HRmax. The control group resumed normal daily activities without any intervention. Blood pressure and body composition were measured, and fasting blood samples were obtained at baseline and 48 h post-trial. Mixed-design ANOVA analysis was employed followed by post hoc t-tests and Bonferroni alpha-correction was used to evaluate interaction, between-group, and within-group differences, respectively.Results indicated that HIIT and MICT similarly affected body fat mass (p = 0.021, ES = 0.19; p = 0.016, ES = 0.30, respectively), body fat percentage (p = 0.037, ES = 0.17; p = 0.041, ES = 0.28, respectively), visceral fat area (p = 0.001, ES = 0.35; p = 0.003, ES = 0.49, respectively) of body composition. A positive outcome was observed for waist/hip ratio (p = 0.033, ES = 0.43) in HIIT, but not MICT (p = 0.163, ES = 0.33). No significant differences were found between groups for any clinical biomarkers. However, pairwise comparison within the group showed a significant decrease in systolic blood pressure (p = 0.018, ES = 0.84), diastolic blood pressure (p = 0.008, ES = 1.76), and triglyceride (p = 0.004, ES = 1.33) in HIIT, but no significant differences were found in the MICT and Control group.Both 8-week HIIT and MICT programmes have similar positive effects on reducing body fat mass, fat percentage, and visceral fat area. However, sedentary adolescents may have limited scope to decrease insulin resistance after these 8-week interventions. Notably, the 8-week HIIT intervention was highly effective in increasing cardiometabolic health compared to the MICT. The exercise intensity threshold value and metabolic outcomes of high-intensity interval sprints should be explored further to extend the long-term benefit in this cohort.\",\"PeriodicalId\":504973,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Physiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Physiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2024.1450341\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Physiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2024.1450341","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究旨在评估和比较为期8周的高强度间歇训练(HIIT)或中等强度持续训练(MICT)计划对中国久坐青少年身体成分和心血管代谢结果的影响。18名体重正常的久坐青少年(年龄:18.5 ± 0.3岁,11名女性)被随机分为三组。HIIT组进行为期8周、每周3次的 "全力以赴 "冲刺,以达到最大心率的85%-95%;MICT组进行为期8周、每周3次的连续跑步,以达到最大心率的65%-75%。对照组则恢复正常的日常活动,不进行任何干预。测量血压和身体成分,并在基线和试验后 48 小时采集空腹血样。结果表明,HIIT 和 MICT 对身体脂肪量的影响相似(P = 0.结果表明,HIIT 和 MICT 对身体成分中的体脂质量(分别为 p = 0.021,ES = 0.19;p = 0.016,ES = 0.30)、体脂百分比(分别为 p = 0.037,ES = 0.17;p = 0.041,ES = 0.28)、内脏脂肪面积(分别为 p = 0.001,ES = 0.35;p = 0.003,ES = 0.49)有相似的影响。在 HIIT 中观察到腰围/臀围比(p = 0.033,ES = 0.43)的积极结果,而在 MICT 中未观察到腰围/臀围比(p = 0.163,ES = 0.33)的积极结果。各组之间的临床生物标志物均无明显差异。然而,组内配对比较显示,HIIT 组的收缩压(p = 0.018,ES = 0.84)、舒张压(p = 0.008,ES = 1.76)和甘油三酯(p = 0.004,ES = 1.33)显著下降,但 MICT 组和对照组没有发现显著差异。然而,久坐不动的青少年经过这8周的干预后,降低胰岛素抵抗的效果可能有限。值得注意的是,与MICT相比,为期8周的HIIT干预在提高心脏代谢健康方面非常有效。应进一步探讨高强度间歇短跑的运动强度阈值和代谢结果,以扩大该人群的长期获益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effect of eight-week high-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training programme on body composition, cardiometabolic risk factors in sedentary adolescents
This study aimed to assess and compare the effect of an 8-week high-intensity interval training (HIIT) or moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) programme on body composition and cardiovascular metabolic outcomes of sedentary adolescents in China.Eighteen sedentary normal-weight adolescents (age: 18.5 ± 0.3 years, 11 females) were randomized into three groups. HIIT group protocol consisted of three sessions/week for 8-week of “all out” sprints to reach 85%–95% of HRmax, and MICT group protocol undertook three sessions/week for 8-week of continuous running to reach 65%–75% of HRmax. The control group resumed normal daily activities without any intervention. Blood pressure and body composition were measured, and fasting blood samples were obtained at baseline and 48 h post-trial. Mixed-design ANOVA analysis was employed followed by post hoc t-tests and Bonferroni alpha-correction was used to evaluate interaction, between-group, and within-group differences, respectively.Results indicated that HIIT and MICT similarly affected body fat mass (p = 0.021, ES = 0.19; p = 0.016, ES = 0.30, respectively), body fat percentage (p = 0.037, ES = 0.17; p = 0.041, ES = 0.28, respectively), visceral fat area (p = 0.001, ES = 0.35; p = 0.003, ES = 0.49, respectively) of body composition. A positive outcome was observed for waist/hip ratio (p = 0.033, ES = 0.43) in HIIT, but not MICT (p = 0.163, ES = 0.33). No significant differences were found between groups for any clinical biomarkers. However, pairwise comparison within the group showed a significant decrease in systolic blood pressure (p = 0.018, ES = 0.84), diastolic blood pressure (p = 0.008, ES = 1.76), and triglyceride (p = 0.004, ES = 1.33) in HIIT, but no significant differences were found in the MICT and Control group.Both 8-week HIIT and MICT programmes have similar positive effects on reducing body fat mass, fat percentage, and visceral fat area. However, sedentary adolescents may have limited scope to decrease insulin resistance after these 8-week interventions. Notably, the 8-week HIIT intervention was highly effective in increasing cardiometabolic health compared to the MICT. The exercise intensity threshold value and metabolic outcomes of high-intensity interval sprints should be explored further to extend the long-term benefit in this cohort.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信