SAFETY, EFFICACY, AND IMPLEMENTATION OF HOME-BASED HIGH-INTENSITY INTERVAL TRAINING FOR PATIENTS WITH CARDIAC DISEASE: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

Ms Rebecca Turnbull, Mr Dylan Perera, Dr Hazel Heng, Associate Professor Adam Semciw
{"title":"SAFETY, EFFICACY, AND IMPLEMENTATION OF HOME-BASED HIGH-INTENSITY INTERVAL TRAINING FOR PATIENTS WITH CARDIAC DISEASE: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW","authors":"Ms Rebecca Turnbull, Mr Dylan Perera, Dr Hazel Heng, Associate Professor Adam Semciw","doi":"10.31189/2165-7629-13-s2.376","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n High-intensity interval training (HIIT) is safe and more effective than moderate-intensity continuous training for improving cardiorespiratory fitness in adults with cardiac disease. Home-based delivery of cardiac rehabilitation has been introduced to increase the uptake and participation of programs. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the safety, efficacy, and implementation of home-based HIIT programs for patients with cardiac disease.\n \n \n \n A systematic review of the literature was conducted in three electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL and EMBASE) before 2nd October 2023. Studies were included if they were written in English, peer-reviewed and compared home-based HIIT to other centre-based or home-based exercise interventions. A secondary analysis investigating intervention safety, efficacy and implementation was conducted using the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework.\n \n \n \n Five studies, involving 153 participants (62 for home-based HIIT and 91 for other home-based or centre-based exercise interventions) were included in the analysis. There were no differences in functional capacity or quality of life (QOL) between home-based HIIT and other centre-based or home-based exercise interventions (p > 0.05). Across all the studies, the reporting rates were highest for program effectiveness (75%) and adoption (75%), followed by reach (70%), implementation (40%), and maintenance (10%). Adverse events were reported during the home-based HIIT intervention in two studies (3%). Participant attrition within home-based HIIT interventions was 8-12%. In studies where adherence to the home-based HIIT protocol was reported, this ranged between 36% and 85%.\n \n \n \n Home-based HIIT resulted in similar effects in functional capacity and QOL as other centre-based and home-based exercise interventions for patients with cardiac disease. HIIT in the home appears to be safe and effective, however adherence to the protocol varies. Further high-quality studies are needed to inform best practices for prescribing HIIT in the home.\n","PeriodicalId":92070,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical exercise physiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical exercise physiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31189/2165-7629-13-s2.376","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

High-intensity interval training (HIIT) is safe and more effective than moderate-intensity continuous training for improving cardiorespiratory fitness in adults with cardiac disease. Home-based delivery of cardiac rehabilitation has been introduced to increase the uptake and participation of programs. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the safety, efficacy, and implementation of home-based HIIT programs for patients with cardiac disease. A systematic review of the literature was conducted in three electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL and EMBASE) before 2nd October 2023. Studies were included if they were written in English, peer-reviewed and compared home-based HIIT to other centre-based or home-based exercise interventions. A secondary analysis investigating intervention safety, efficacy and implementation was conducted using the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. Five studies, involving 153 participants (62 for home-based HIIT and 91 for other home-based or centre-based exercise interventions) were included in the analysis. There were no differences in functional capacity or quality of life (QOL) between home-based HIIT and other centre-based or home-based exercise interventions (p > 0.05). Across all the studies, the reporting rates were highest for program effectiveness (75%) and adoption (75%), followed by reach (70%), implementation (40%), and maintenance (10%). Adverse events were reported during the home-based HIIT intervention in two studies (3%). Participant attrition within home-based HIIT interventions was 8-12%. In studies where adherence to the home-based HIIT protocol was reported, this ranged between 36% and 85%. Home-based HIIT resulted in similar effects in functional capacity and QOL as other centre-based and home-based exercise interventions for patients with cardiac disease. HIIT in the home appears to be safe and effective, however adherence to the protocol varies. Further high-quality studies are needed to inform best practices for prescribing HIIT in the home.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
针对心脏病患者的家庭高强度间歇训练的安全性、有效性和实施:系统综述
与中等强度的持续训练相比,高强度间歇训练(HIIT)在改善成人心脏病患者的心肺功能方面更安全、更有效。为了提高计划的接受度和参与度,人们开始在家中进行心脏康复训练。本系统性综述旨在研究针对心脏病患者的家庭 HIIT 项目的安全性、有效性和实施情况。 在 2023 年 10 月 2 日之前,我们在三个电子数据库(MEDLINE、CINAHL 和 EMBASE)中对文献进行了系统性回顾。纳入的研究必须是用英语撰写、经过同行评议并将家庭 HIIT 与其他中心或家庭运动干预措施进行比较的研究。采用 "到达、效果、采用、实施和维持"(RE-AIM)框架对干预的安全性、有效性和实施情况进行了二次分析。 五项研究共涉及 153 名参与者(62 人参与了在家进行的 HIIT 运动,91 人参与了其他在家或在中心进行的运动干预)。在功能能力或生活质量(QOL)方面,居家 HIIT 与其他中心或居家运动干预没有差异(P > 0.05)。在所有研究中,计划有效性(75%)和采用率(75%)的报告率最高,其次是到达率(70%)、实施率(40%)和维持率(10%)。有两项研究(3%)报告了在家进行 HIIT 干预期间发生的不良事件。居家 HIIT 干预的参与者流失率为 8-12%。在报告了在家进行 HIIT 方案坚持率的研究中,坚持率介于 36% 和 85% 之间。 家庭 HIIT 对心脏病患者的功能能力和 QOL 的影响与其他中心和家庭运动干预相似。在家中进行 HIIT 似乎既安全又有效,但对方案的依从性却不尽相同。我们需要进一步开展高质量的研究,为在家中进行 HIIT 的最佳实践提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Effects of 12 Months of Kettlebell Training on an Individual with Myasthenia Gravis Effective Manuscript Writing: A Learned Process Cardiorespiratory Effects of Tai Chi Versus Walking: Exploratory Data from the LEAP Trial Stroke, Step Count, and Alzheimer’s ECG Characteristics of Young High School Athletes in Northwest Florida
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1