Relativizing effects of high intensity interval training vs continuous moderate

Bruno Nicanor Mello Da Silva,Fabrício Boscolo Del Vecchio,Leony Morgana Galliano

doi:10.1590/1980-0037.2020v22e68179

Abstract

Abstract The production of systematic reviews and meta-analysis increased substantially. In this sense, we highlight those comparing Moderate-Intensity Continuous Training (MICT) and High-Intensity Interval Training (HIIT). It is known that meta-analyses of well-conducted studies are considered as a superior level of scientific evidence; therefore, it is relevant to critically analyze all those articles, especially speaking about the absence of differences between MICT and HIIT reported in previous studies. Widely, analyzing studies included in a meta-analysis frequently is possible to identify a lack of crucial information to the understanding of the exercise intervention, and this can skew readers interpretation and may conduct an equivocate comprehension of the results. In meta-analysis regarding the effects of MICT and HIIT in body composition, the relativization of the full length of training time of each intervention is frequently lacking. Data from previously published meta-analysis was reanalyzed, verifying higher relative reductions of body fat percentage to the HIIT group in comparison to the MICT group when considered the duration of interventions. In this sense, we suggest that all meta-analysis about this subject need not only to provide complete analysis in body composition but also consider analysis relativized of time spent training.

Highlights

According to the traditional pyramid of evidence, meta-analyses are hierarchically better than other types of studies in providing a theoretical basis for guidelines to professional practices[1]
In a recently published meta-analysis[6], Moreira et al.[10] study does not report the intensity of rest in High-Intensity Interval Training (HIIT) exercises, as well as the duration of sessions
The effort period intensity in HIIT was 20% above of anaerobic threshold (AT) and the training sessions were monitored via heart rate (HR) associated with AT

Summary

Introduction

According to the traditional pyramid of evidence, meta-analyses are hierarchically better than other types of studies in providing a theoretical basis for guidelines to professional practices[1]. On the view of the relevance of the thematic involving the MICT and HIIT training protocols in body composition and the methodological implications on meta-analyses conductions, we are compelled to realize considerations regarding recent articles that address about this theme, mainly on the possible absence of difference between MICT and HIIT related in some recent investigations[4,6].

Results

Conclusion