Key result
Different interval training intensities yield no difference in hemodynamic and cardiorespiratory outcomes in active elderly men.
Why the study?
Although interval training is an efficient method, its chronic effects at different intensities on hemodynamic, autonomic, and cardiorespiratory variables in the elderly needed verification.
Does interval training of different intensities improve hemodynamic, autonomic, and cardiorespiratory variables in physically active elderly men?
RCT (n=24)
randomized
Does interval training of different intensities improve hemodynamic, autonomic, and cardiorespiratory variables in physically active elderly men?
p-value: p=> 0.05
Interval training of different intensities did not yield statistically significant differences in hemodynamic or cardiorespiratory variables compared to control, though effect sizes suggest potential clinical benefits for healthy elderly men.
Equivalent effects across intensities; leaves open benefits versus control in active elderly men.
Interval training (IT) is a very efficient method. We aimed to verify the chronic effects of IT with different intensities on hemodynamic, autonomic and cardiorespiratory variables in the elderly. Twenty-four physically active elderly men participated in the study and were randomized into three groups: Training Group A (TGA, n = 8), Training Group B (TGB, n = 8) and control group (CG, n = 8). The TGA and TGB groups performed 32 sessions (48 h interval). TGA presented 4 min (55 to 60% of HRmax) and 1 min (70 to 75% of HRmax). The TGB training groups performed the same protocol, but performed 4 min at 45 to 50% HRmax and 1 min at 60 to 65% HRmax. Both training groups performed each set six times, totaling 30 min per session. Assessments were performed pre (baseline) after the 16th and 32nd intervention session. The CG performed only assessments. Hemodynamic, autonomic and cardiorespiratory (estimated VO2max) variables were evaluated. There were no significant differences between protocols and times (p > 0.05). However, the effect size and percentage delta indicated positive clinical outcomes, indicating favorable responses of IT. IT may be a strategy to improve hemodynamic, autonomic and cardiorespiratory behavior in healthy elderly people.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sant’Ana et al. (2023) conducted an RCT in physically active elderly (n=24). Interval training (IT) vs. Control group was evaluated on Hemodynamic, autonomic and cardiorespiratory variables (p=> 0.05). Interval training with different intensities yielded no significant differences in hemodynamic, autonomic, and cardiorespiratory variables between protocols and times in active elderly men (p > 0.05).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: