Time-efficient and computer-guided sprint interval exercise training for improving health in the workplace: a randomised mixed-methods feasibility study in office-based employees

Abstract

Background: The efficacy of high-intensity interval training (HIT) as a time-efficient exercise strategy for beneficially modifying risk factors for cardiovascular disease has repeatedly been demonstrated in controlled laboratory settings. However, the effectiveness of HIT in an unsupervised workplace setting has not been investigated. The objective of this study was to use mixed methods to investigate the feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness of a shortduration, high-intensity exercise intervention (REHIT) when applied unsupervised in a workplace setting. Methods: Twenty-five office-workers (mean ± SD age: 47 ± 9 y, BMI: 27.5 ± 4.4 kg•m − 2 , VO 2 max: 28 ± 7 mL•kg − 1 •min − 1) completed a 6-week REHIT intervention unsupervised in their workplace (n = 13, 6 men), or acted as a nointervention control (n = 12, 6 men). The intervention consisted of 2 sessions/week of low-intensity (~25 W) cycling interspersed with 2 'all-out' sprints, increasing in duration from 10 to 20 s per sprint over the 6 weeks (total timecommitment: 8:40 min per session). VO 2 max was assessed pre-and post-training, whilst questionnaire-based measures of exercise enjoyment, self-efficacy, and acceptability were completed post-training. Eight participants also completed post-intervention semi-structured interviews. Results: VO 2 max significantly improved in the exercise group (2.25 ± 0.75 L•min − 1 vs. 2.42 ± 0.82 L•min − 1 ; + 7.4%) compared to the control group (2.22 ± 0.72 L•min − 1 vs. 2.17 ± 0.74 L•min − 1 ; − 2.3%; time*intervention interaction effect: p < 0.01). Participants considered the REHIT intervention acceptable and enjoyable (PACES: 89 ± 17 out of 119) and were confident in their ability to continue to perform REHIT (7.8 ± 1.2 out of 9). Qualitative data revealed that REHIT offered a time-efficient opportunity to exercise, that was perceived as achievable, and which encouraged highly valued post-exercise outcomes (e.g. progress towards health/fitness benefits).

Low-volume high-intensity interval training improves cardiometabolic health, work ability and well-being in severely obese individuals: a randomized-controlled trial sub-study

“…Moreover, given that differences in modalities and delivery of the intervention may lead to different outcomes in “real‐world” conditions, future studies may wish to examine the feasibility of low-volume HIIT implemented directly in the workplace. Recent research, however, shows first promising evidence that low-volume HIIT could be feasibly applied to sedentary office workers in an unsupervised workplace setting [ 72 ].…”

Reduced exertion high-intensity interval training (REHIT) in an adult with Cystic Fibrosis: A mixed-methods case study

“…For those who present with an exacerbation more than two times per year, there should be a focus on promoting an active lifestyle that does not require substantial effort [ 21 ]. Given that qualitative findings suggest that perceptions of REHIT are enhanced when sprints are shorter [ 22 ], altering the REHIT protocol to 4 × 10s sprint should hypothetically induce similar physiological adaptations. Indeed, this not only ensures a matched workload, but may be a more favourable and manageable experience in comparison to both traditional REHIT and MICT, whilst still placing minimal toll on the respiratory system.…”

Heterogeneity and incidence of non-response for changes in cardiorespiratory fitness following time-efficient sprint interval exercise training

“…We conducted a secondary analysis of six published studies conducted in our laboratories between 2012 and 2020 (Metcalfe et al, 2020(Metcalfe et al, , 2016(Metcalfe et al, , 2012Nalçakan et al, 2018;Songsorn et al, 2016;Thomas et al, 2020). This included a sample of 117 pooled training participants (68 male, 49 female) who underwent an almost identical SIT intervention (described in full below), and 40 pooled no-intervention control participants (16 male, 24 female) from three of these studies who underwent two assessments of maximal oxygen uptake either ~4 (n=14; (Songsorn et al, 2016)) or ~6 (n=26; (Metcalfe et al, 2020(Metcalfe et al, , 2012)) weeks apart.…”