Key result
Interval training for 12 weeks significantly improved heart rate recovery at 2 minutes compared to no training in patients with stable heart failure.
Why the study?
Does interval or continuous exercise training improve heart rate recovery in stable heart failure patients?
RCT (n=41)
randomized
Does interval or continuous exercise training improve heart rate recovery in stable heart failure patients?
Interval training may be superior to continuous training for improving heart rate recovery at 2 minutes in patients with stable heart failure, particularly those with abnormal baseline values.
Supports interval training in stable HF rehab; confirms autonomic benefits versus no exercise in this RCT.
OBJECTIVE: It is unclear which exercise training protocol yields superior heart rate recovery (HRR) improvement in heart failure (HF) patients. Whether baseline HRR normality plays a role in the improvement is unknown. We hypothesized that an exercise training protocol and baseline HRR normality would be factors in altering HRR in HF patients. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, controlled and 3 group parallel study, 41 stable HF patients were randomly assigned to 3-times-weekly training sessions for 12 weeks, consisting of i) 30 minutes of interval training (IT) (n=17, 63.7±8.8 years old) versus ii) 30 minutes of continuous training (CT) (n=13, 59.6±6.8 years old) versus iii) no training (CON) (n=11, 60.6±9.9 years old). Each patient had cardiopulmonary exercise testing before and after the training program. Maximum heart rates attained during the test and heart rates at 1 and 2 min (HRR1 and HRR2) during the recovery phase were recorded. Paired samples t-test or Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used for comparisons before and after training. One-way ANOVA or Kruskal-Wallis variance analysis was used for comparisons among groups. RESULTS: HRR1 was unchanged after training. HRR2 improved in the IT group after training, and post-training HRR2 values were significantly faster in the IT group than in controls. Both HRR1 and HRR2 was significantly faster, irrespective of exercise protocol in patients with abnormal baseline values after training. CONCLUSION: HRR1 did not improve after training. HRR2 improved only in the IT group. Both HRRs in patients with abnormal baseline values improved after both exercise protocols. IT might be superior to CT in improving HRR2. Baseline HRR might play a role in its response to exercise.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yaylalı et al. (2014) conducted an RCT in Heart failure (n=41). Interval training (IT) and continuous training (CT) vs. No training (CON) was evaluated on Heart rate recovery at 1 and 2 minutes (HRR1 and HRR2). Interval training for 12 weeks significantly improved heart rate recovery at 2 minutes compared to no training in patients with stable heart failure.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: