Evidence Hub

Individual cardiovascular responsiveness to work-matched exercise within the moderate- and severe-intensity domains

Maturana FM, Schellhorn P, Erz G, Burgstahler C, Widmann M, Munz B, Soares RN, Murias JM et al.

European journal of applied physiology, 2021

42 participants · 40 citations

Abstract

Purpose: We investigated the cardiovascular individual response to 6 weeks (3×/week) of work-matched within the severe-intensity domain (high-intensity interval training, HIIT) or moderate-intensity domain (moderate-intensity continuous training, MICT). In addition, we analyzed the cardiovascular factors at baseline underlying the response variability.

Methods: 42 healthy sedentary participants were randomly assigned to HIIT or MICT. We applied the region of practical equivalence-method for identifying the levels of responders to the maximal oxygen uptake (V̇O2max) response. For investigating the influence of cardiovascular markers, we trained a Bayesian machine learning model on cardiovascular markers.

Results: Despite that HIIT and MICT induced significant increases in V̇O2max, HIIT had greater improvements than MICT (p 2max was associated with initial cardiorespiratory fitness, arterial stiffness, and left-ventricular (LV) mass and LV end-diastolic diameter in HIIT; whereas, microvascular responsiveness and right-ventricular (RV) excursion velocity showed a significant association in MICT.

Conclusion: Our findings highlight the critical influence of exercise-intensity domains and biological variability on the individual V̇O2max response. The incidence of "non-responders" in MICT was one third of the group; whereas, no "non-responders" were observed in HIIT. The incidence of "responders" was 11 out of 21 participants in MICT, and 20 out of 21 participants in HIIT. The…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 42 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free