An After-School, high-intensity, interval physical activity programme improves health-related fitness in children

Abstract

Health problems related to a low level of physical activity (PA) in children and adolescents have prompted research into extracurricular PA programs. This study was designed to determine the effects of two different levels of PA on the health-related fitness of school children. Ninety-four girls and boys (7-9 years) were randomly assigned to a control group (CG) or intervention group (IG). Over a 12 week study period, children in the CG participated in a similar PA program to that of a standard school physical education program while those in the IG completed a high intensity interval training (HIIT) program. Both programs involved two 40 minute extracurricular sessions per week. Our findings indicate that the HIIT intervention improved motor capacity (speed/agility), Vpeak, VO 2 m ax and excess post-exercise oxygen consumption (EPOC) (p < 0.05) along with the musculoskeletal capacity of the lower trunk (mean propulsive velocity and standing long jump, p < 0.05). The PA program had no effect on anthropometric variables or hand-grip strength. The data indicate that a 12 week strength training program using workloads adapted to children may significantly improve several markers of health and physical fitness compared to a standard school PA program.

Effect of High-Intensity Interval Training versus Moderate-Intensity Continuous Training on Cardiorespiratory Fitness in Children and Adolescents: A Meta-Analysis

“…Study characteristics are presented as mean ± SD unless otherwise stated. Eighteen effects from 17 RCTs [11,12,13,14,15,16,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28] of 563 participants were included in the review (Table 1). Of the 17 included studies, 10 enrolled obese subjects [11,12,13,16,20,21,23,26,27,28], 1 included normal weight and obese subjects [39], and 6 included normal weight subjects [14,18,19,22,24,25].…”

“…Eighteen effects from 17 RCTs [11,12,13,14,15,16,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28] of 563 participants were included in the review (Table 1). Of the 17 included studies, 10 enrolled obese subjects [11,12,13,16,20,21,23,26,27,28], 1 included normal weight and obese subjects [39], and 6 included normal weight subjects [14,18,19,22,24,25]. Five studies included boys only [13,18,23,25,27], 2 studies did not reported gender [15,22] and the 10 remaining studies included both boys and girls [11,12,14,16,19,20,21,24,26,28].…”

“…Of the 17 included studies, 10 enrolled obese subjects [11,12,13,16,20,21,23,26,27,28], 1 included normal weight and obese subjects [39], and 6 included normal weight subjects [14,18,19,22,24,25]. Five studies included boys only [13,18,23,25,27], 2 studies did not reported gender [15,22] and the 10 remaining studies included both boys and girls [11,12,14,16,19,20,21,24,26,28]. Five studies enrolled children under 12 years old [14,18,19,24,25], and the other studies enrolled children aged 12 years old and older [11,12,13,15,16,20,21,22,23,26,27,28].…”

“…Five studies included boys only [13,18,23,25,27], 2 studies did not reported gender [15,22] and the 10 remaining studies included both boys and girls [11,12,14,16,19,20,21,24,26,28]. Five studies enrolled children under 12 years old [14,18,19,24,25], and the other studies enrolled children aged 12 years old and older [11,12,13,15,16,20,21,22,23,26,27,28]. Sixteen studies were RCTs [11,12,13,15,16,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27] and a 1 was a non-RCT [28].…”

“…In recent years, a number of experimental studies compared the effects of HIIT and MICT on CRF in children and adolescents, but the findings were inconsistent and inconclusive. Some intervention studies demonstrated that HIIT intervention stimulated significant increases in relative CRF when compared with MICT [11,12,13,14], while other studies did not observe any difference between these two methods [15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28]. Although there have been some systematic review suggested that the effect of HIIT on CRF is better than MICT [29,30], they focused on obese populations [30], or compared effect sizes with a non-exercise control group rather than a MICT group [31].…”