PMID 31105580

Research
All papers

Changes in Physical Fitness After 12 Weeks of Structured Concurrent Exercise Training, High Intensity Interval Training, or Whole-Body Electromyostimulation Training in Sedentary Middle-Aged Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Amaro-Gahete FJ, De-la-O A, Jurado-Fasoli L, Dote-Montero M, Gutiérrez Á, Ruiz JR, Castillo MJ

Question

Do traditional concurrent training, high-intensity interval training, and high-intensity interval training plus whole-body electromyostimulation differ in their effects on physical fitness in sedentary middle-aged adults?

Summary

This 12-week randomized controlled trial compared structured concurrent exercise, high-intensity interval training, high-intensity interval training plus whole-body electromyostimulation, and a control group in sedentary adults aged 40 to 65 years. All three exercise programs improved cardiorespiratory fitness and several strength outcomes compared with control, with no clear superiority of HIIT or HIIT plus electromyostimulation over the concurrent-training program. Attendance was very high among included participants, but the study required supervised small-group sessions and excluded people with major disease.

Methodology

  • Sedentary healthy middle-aged adults aged 40-65 years.
  • 74 participants.
  • Treadmill long intervals and bodyweight circuit short intervals.
  • Recovery: At least 72 hours between sessions; within-session recovery not specified in this article.
  • Intensity: Long intervals at >95% VO2max; short intervals at Borg RPE 6-9.
  • 40-65 min/week across 2 sessions; exact per-session duration not specified.
  • 2 sessions per week.
  • 12 weeks.
  • 12-week randomized controlled trial with parallel groups following CONSORT guidelines.
  • VO2max, Total treadmill test duration, Knee extension and flexion peak torque, and Total hand grip strength were tracked.

Outcomes

Cardiorespiratory fitness

PAR, HIIT, and WB-EMS similarly increased VO2max, maximal heart rate, and total test duration compared with control; no differences were found between exercise interventions.

Compared with control, all P <= 0.034; no differences between exercise groups, all P >= 0.2. HIIT relative VO2max increased 11% (P = 0.024) and total test duration increased 23% (P = 0.003).

Improved

Knee and hand strength

PAR, HIIT, and WB-EMS improved extension and flexion peak torque and total hand grip compared with control.

Exercise groups versus control all P <= 0.031; HIIT extension and flexion peak torque increased 10% and 14%, respectively, both P <= 0.003.

Improved

Core strength endurance

All three exercise interventions improved trunk and plank/bridge endurance measures compared with control.

Exercise groups versus control all P <= 0.002; HIIT side bridge increased 111% (P < 0.001) and front plank increased 79%.

Improved

Added whole-body electromyostimulation

WB-EMS showed slightly greater improvements in some variables but was not statistically superior to HIIT or PAR for overall physical fitness.

Authors concluded WB-EMS changes were not superior; between-exercise-group differences generally P >= 0.1 or P >= 0.2 depending on outcome, except HIIT versus WB-EMS for total hand grip P = 0.042.

No clear change

Insights

  • Twice-weekly supervised HIIT improved VO2max and strength outcomes in sedentary middle-aged adults over 12 weeks.
  • HIIT was not clearly superior to a WHO-guideline-based concurrent training program for physical fitness outcomes.
  • High adherence was achieved with supervised small groups, rescheduling, gradual progression, and continuous intensity monitoring.
  • Bodyweight circuit HIIT elements are more translatable to HIITplay than treadmill VO2max-prescribed long intervals or WB-EMS.

Limitations

  • Relatively small sample for sex-specific analysis.
  • May be underpowered to detect differences between three exercise methodologies.
  • No long-term follow-up.
  • Findings are limited to sedentary healthy adults aged 40-65 years.
  • Exact HIIT interval durations and progression details were not provided in this article.

Safety

  • Potential participants completed a medical examination before enrollment.
  • Participants with cardiovascular disease, diabetes mellitus, cancer, or major illness limiting exercise were excluded.
  • No specific adverse events were reported in the article; two participants dropped out for medical reasons without detail.
  • Heart rate was continuously monitored during exercise.