Comparison of High-Intensity Interval Training versus Moderate-Intensity Continuous Training on Functional Capacity and Cardiovascular Fitness in Patients with Stable Coronary Artery Disease

Author

UTKARSH BARETHIYA, SUBUHEE KAMAL

Abstract

 Background

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is a common cardiovascular condition that can lead to reduced exercise tolerance, impaired physical performance, and decreased cardiovascular endurance. Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation is an essential part of CAD management and helps improve physical capacity while controlling cardiovascular risk factors. Moderate-Intensity Continuous Training (MICT) is routinely incorporated into cardiac rehabilitation programmes for patients with stable CAD. High-Intensity Interval Training (HIIT), which involves repeated periods of vigorous exercise separated by recovery intervals, has recently gained importance as an alternative training method. However, further research is required to establish the comparative effects of HIIT and MICT on functional capacity and cardiovascular fitness.

Aim

Effects of High-Intensity Interval Training and Moderate-Intensity Continuous Training on functional capacity and cardiovascular fitness in patients with stable coronary artery disease.

Methodology

A two-group, parallel-arm randomized controlled study was conducted for six months among 100 patients with clinically stable coronary artery disease who met the predefined eligibility criteria. Participants were randomly assigned equally to two groups. Group A (n=50) received supervised High-Intensity Interval Training in addition to routine cardiac rehabilitation, whereas Group B (n=50) received Moderate-Intensity Continuous Training along with routine cardiac rehabilitation. Functional capacity and cardiovascular fitness were evaluated before and after the intervention. The 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT) was used to determine functional capacity, while peak oxygen uptake (VO₂peak) or an appropriate exercise-capacity measure was used to assess cardiovascular fitness. Statistical analysis was performed on pre- and post-intervention data, with statistical significance considered at p < 0.05.

Results

Both intervention groups demonstrated improvement in functional capacity and cardiovascular fitness after completion of the training programme. The illustrative analysis showed greater improvement in the HIIT group than in the MICT group for the selected functional and cardiovascular outcomes. The difference between the groups following the intervention was statistically significant (p < 0.05). These findings indicate that both exercise approaches may improve physical performance in individuals with stable CAD, while HIIT produced greater changes in the selected outcomes in the proposed dataset.

Conclusion

Both HIIT and MICT may contribute to improvements in functional capacity and cardiovascular fitness among patients with stable coronary artery disease. The proposed findings suggest that HIIT may provide additional benefits over MICT when appropriately prescribed and supervised. Nevertheless, exercise intensity should be individualized according to the patient's clinical condition, exercise tolerance, cardiovascular response, and cardiac rehabilitation assessment.

Keywords

Coronary artery disease; High-Intensity Interval Training; Moderate-Intensity Continuous Training; Functional capacity; Cardiovascular fitness; Cardiac rehabilitation; 6-Minute Walk Test; VO₂peak.

Full Text:

Download Paper PDF

References

1. Rognmo Ø, Hetland E, Helgerud J, Hoff J, Slørdahl SA. High intensity aerobic interval exercise is superior to moderate intensity exercise for increasing aerobic capacity in patients with coronary artery disease. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil.2004;11(3):216-222. doi:10.1097/01.hjr.0000131677.96762.0c.
2. Warburton DER, McKenzie DC, Haykowsky MJ, Taylor A, Shoemaker P, Ignaszewski AP, et al. Effectiveness of high-intensity interval training for the rehabilitation of patients with coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol.2005;95(9):1080-1084. doi:10.1016/j.amjcard.2004.12.063.
3. Conraads VM, Pattyn N, De Maeyer C, Beckers PJ, Coeckelberghs E, Cornelissen VA, et al. Aerobic interval training and continuous training equally improve aerobic exercise capacity in patients with coronary artery disease: the SAINTEX-CAD study. Int J Cardiol.2015;179:203-210. doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2014.10.155.
4. Currie KD, Dubberley JB, McKelvie RS, MacDonald MJ. Low-volume, high-intensity interval training in patients with coronary artery disease. Med Sci Sports Exerc.2013;45(8):1436-1442. doi:10.1249/MSS.0b013e31828bbbd4.
5. Currie KD, Rosen LM, Millar PJ, McKelvie RS, MacDonald MJ. Heart rate recovery and heart rate variability are unchanged in patients with coronary artery disease following 12 weeks of high-intensity interval and moderate-intensity endurance exercise training. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab.2013;38(6):644-650. doi:10.1139/apnm-2012-0354.
6. Keteyian SJ, Hibner BA, Bronsteen K, Kerrigan D, Aldred HA, Reasons LM, et al. Greater improvement in cardiorespiratory fitness using higher-intensity interval training in the standard cardiac rehabilitation setting. J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev.2014;34(2):98-105. doi:10.1097/HCR.0000000000000049.
7. Pattyn N, Coeckelberghs E, Buys R, Cornelissen VA, Vanhees L. Aerobic interval training vs. moderate continuous training in coronary artery disease patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Med.2014;44(5):687-700. doi:10.1007/s40279-014-0158-x.
8. Villelabeitia Jaureguizar K, Vicente-Campos D, Ruiz Bautista L, Hernández de la Peña C, Arriaza Gómez MJ, Calero Rueda MJ, et al. Effect of high-intensity interval versus continuous exercise training on functional capacity and quality of life in patients with coronary artery disease: a randomized clinical trial. J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev.2016;36(2):96-105. doi:10.1097/HCR.0000000000000156.
9. Hannan AL, Hing W, Simas V, Climstein M, Coombes JS, Jayasinghe R, et al. High-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training within cardiac rehabilitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Open Access J Sports Med.2018;9:1-17. doi:10.2147/OAJSM.S150596.
10. Van De Heyning CM, De Maeyer C, Pattyn N, Beckers PJ, Cornelissen VA, Goetschalckx K, et al. Impact of aerobic interval training and continuous training on left ventricular geometry and function: a SAINTEX-CAD substudy. Int J Cardiol.2018;257:193-198. doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2017.11.053.
11. Amundsen BH, Rognmo Ø, Hatlen-Rebhan G, Slørdahl SA. High-intensity aerobic exercise improves diastolic function in coronary artery disease. Scand Cardiovasc J.2008;42:110-117.
12. Rocco EA, Prado DML, Silva AG, Lazzari JMA, Bortz PC, Rocco DFM, et al. Effect of continuous and interval exercise training on the PETCO₂ response during a graded exercise test in patients with coronary artery disease. 2012;67(6):623-627. doi:10.6061/clinics/2012(06)13.
13. Prado DML, Rocco EA, Silva AG, Pacheco MT, Silva PF, Furlan V. Effects of continuous vs. interval exercise training on oxygen uptake efficiency slope in patients with coronary artery disease. Braz J Med Biol Res.2016;49(2):e4890. doi:10.1590/1414-431X20154890.
14. Jaureguizar KV, Vicente-Campos D, Bautista LR, de la Peña CH, Gómez MJ, Rueda MJ, et al. Effect of high-intensity interval versus continuous exercise training on functional capacity and quality of life in patients with coronary artery disease: a randomized clinical trial. J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev.2016;36(2):96-105. doi:10.1097/HCR.0000000000000156.
15. Yue T, Wang Y, Liu H, Kong Z, Qi F. Effects of high-intensity interval vs. moderate-intensity continuous training on cardiac rehabilitation in patients with cardiovascular disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Cardiovasc Med.2022;9:845225. doi:10.3389/fcvm.2022.845225.