Key result
Habitual high-intensity cross-training was associated with similar central pulse wave velocity as active controls (5.3 m/s), both significantly better than sedentary controls (7.1 m/s, p≤0.001).
Why the study?
Does habitual high-intensity cross-training improve arterial stiffness in middle-aged adults compared to a sedentary lifestyle?
Cross-Sectional (n=30)
Does habitual high-intensity cross-training improve arterial stiffness in middle-aged adults compared to a sedentary lifestyle?
Absolute Event Rate: 5.3% vs 7.1%
p-value: p=≤0.001
Habitual high-intensity cross-training provides similar cardiovascular fitness and arterial stiffness benefits as traditional aerobic exercise, without negatively impacting arterial stiffness compared to a sedentary lifestyle.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
May support high-intensity cross-training as alternative for arterial stiffness; leaves open causal confirmation versus sedentary lifestyle in RCTs.
Burr et al. (2017) reported a cross-sectional. High-intensity cross-training (HICT) vs. Aerobically active and sedentary controls was evaluated on Central pulse wave velocity (PWV) (p=≤0.001). Habitual high-intensity cross-training was associated with similar central pulse wave velocity as active controls (5.3 m/s), both significantly better than sedentary controls (7.1 m/s, p≤0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: