Effects of High-Intensity Interval Training versus Continuous Training on Physical Fitness, Cardiovascular Function and Quality of Life in Heart Failure Patients.

Abstract

IntroductionPhysical fitness is an important prognostic factor in heart failure (HF). To improve fitness, different types of exercise have been explored, with recent focus on high-intensity interval training (HIT). We comprehensively compared effects of HIT versus continuous training (CT) in HF patients NYHA II-III on physical fitness, cardiovascular function and structure, and quality of life, and hypothesize that HIT leads to superior improvements compared to CT.MethodsTwenty HF patients (male:female 19:1, 64±8 yrs, ejection fraction 38±6%) were allocated to 12-weeks of HIT (10*1-minute at 90% maximal workload—alternated by 2.5 minutes at 30% maximal workload) or CT (30 minutes at 60–75% of maximal workload). Before and after intervention, we examined physical fitness (incremental cycling test), cardiac function and structure (echocardiography), vascular function and structure (ultrasound) and quality of life (SF-36, Minnesota living with HF questionnaire (MLHFQ)).ResultsTraining improved maximal workload, peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak) related to the predicted VO2peak, oxygen uptake at the anaerobic threshold, and maximal oxygen pulse (all P<0.05), whilst no differences were present between HIT and CT (N.S.). We found no major changes in resting cardiovascular function and structure. SF-36 physical function score improved after training (P<0.05), whilst SF-36 total score and MLHFQ did not change after training (N.S.).ConclusionTraining induced significant improvements in parameters of physical fitness, although no evidence for superiority of HIT over CT was demonstrated. No major effect of training was found on cardiovascular structure and function or quality of life in HF patients NYHA II-III.Trial RegistrationNederlands Trial Register NTR3671