Key result
Continuous exercise training significantly improved early heart rate recovery (from 15±9 to 24±12 bpm, P=0.02) in patients with chronic heart failure, whereas interval training did not.
Why the study?
Does continuous exercise training improve heart rate recovery compared to interval training in patients with stable chronic heart failure?
Population
29 stable chronic heart failure (CHF) patients (24 completed the program)
Comparison
Continuous exercise training for 36 sessions… vs Interval exercise training for 36 sessions…
Design
RCT, randomly assigned
Follow-up
36 sessions (3 times per week)
Authors
Loading...
Favors continuous over interval training for autonomic recovery in chronic HF; extends RCT data on exercise modality effects.
RCT (n=29)
randomly assigned
Does continuous exercise training improve heart rate recovery compared to interval training in patients with stable chronic heart failure?
p-value: p=0.02
Continuous exercise training, but not interval training, significantly improves early heart rate recovery (a marker of parasympathetic activity) in patients with chronic heart failure.
Dimopoulos et al. (2006) conducted an RCT in chronic heart failure (n=29). Continuous exercise training vs. Interval exercise training (100% peak work rate for 30s alternating with 30s rest) was evaluated on Heart rate recovery at one minute (HRR1) (p=0.02). Continuous exercise training significantly improved early heart rate recovery (from 15±9 to 24±12 bpm, P=0.02) in patients with chronic heart failure, whereas interval training did not.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: