Key result
Supervised exercise training fails to significantly reduce cardiovascular risk scores in older adults.
Why the study?
The study aimed to compare the effects of 5 years of supervised exercise training (ExComb), including HIIT and MICT subgroups, with control on the cardiovascular risk profile in older adults.
Does 5 years of supervised exercise training reduce cardiovascular risk factors in older adults compared to standard physical activity recommendations?
RCT (n=1,567)
Single-blind (Test personnel blinded)
Randomized 2:1:1, stratified by sex and cohabitation status
No
Does 5 years of supervised exercise training reduce cardiovascular risk factors in older adults compared to standard physical activity recommendations?
Mean Difference: -0.19 (95% CI -0.46–0.07)
p-value: p=0.055
Five years of supervised exercise training in older adults had little effect on the continuous cardiovascular risk profile compared to an active control group, though HIIT showed consistent benefits in cardiorespiratory fitness.
Supervised exercise does not reduce cardiovascular risk scores in older adults; challenges assumptions from shorter trials and redirects focus to fitness endpoints.
Aims The aim of this study was to compare the effects of 5 years of supervised exercise training (ExComb), and the differential effects of subgroups of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) and moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT), with control on the cardiovascular risk profile in older adults. Methods and results Older adults aged 70–77 years from Trondheim, Norway (n = 1567, 50% women), able to safely perform exercise training were randomized to 5 years of two weekly sessions of HIIT [∼90% of peak heart rate (HR), n = 400] or MICT (∼70% of peak HR, n = 387), together forming ExComb (n = 787), or control (instructed to follow physical activity recommendations, n = 780). The main outcome was a continuous cardiovascular risk score (CCR), individual cardiovascular risk factors, and peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak). CCR was not significantly lower [−0.19, 99% confidence interval (CI) −0.46 to 0.07] and VO2peak was not significantly higher (0.39 mL/kg/min, 99% CI −0.22 to 1.00) for ExComb vs. control. HIIT showed higher VO2peak (0.76 mL/kg/min, 99% CI 0.02–1.51), but not lower CCR (−0.32, 99% CI −0.64 to 0.01) vs. control. MICT did not show significant differences compared to control or HIIT. Individual risk factors mostly did not show significant between-group differences, with some exceptions for HIIT being better than control. There was no significant effect modification by sex. The number of cardiovascular events was similar across groups. The healthy and fit study sample, and contamination and cross-over between intervention groups, challenged the possibility of detecting between-group differences. Conclusions Five years of supervised exercise training in older adults had little effect on cardiovascular risk profile and did not reduce cardiovascular events. Registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01666340.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Letnes et al. (2021) conducted an RCT in Older adults (n=1,567). Supervised exercise training (ExComb: combination of HIIT and MICT) vs. Control (instructed to follow physical activity recommendations) was evaluated on Continuous cardiovascular risk score (CCR) at 5 years (MD -0.19, 95% CI -0.46 to 0.07, p=0.055). Five years of supervised exercise training (ExComb) in older adults did not significantly reduce the continuous cardiovascular risk score compared to control (MD -0.19, 99% CI -0.46 to 0.07, p=0.055).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: