Within-session responses to high-intensity interval training in spinal cord injury

Abstract

Despite a higher intensity and peak cardiorespiratory strain, all participants preferred interval training versus moderate exercise. Examining long-term efficacy and feasibility of interval training in this population is merited, considering that exercise intensity is recognized as the most important variable factor of exercise programming to optimize maximal oxygen uptake. Implications for Rehabilitation Spinal cord injury (SCI) reduces locomotion which impairs voluntary physical activity, typically resulting in a reduction in peak oxygen uptake and enhanced chronic disease risk. In various able-bodied populations, completion of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) has been consistently reported to improve cardiorespiratory fitness and other health-related outcomes, although its efficacy in persons with SCI is poorly understood. Data from this study in 9 men and women with SCI show similar changes in oxygen uptake and heart in response to HIIT compared to a prolonged bout of aerobic exercise, although peak values were higher in response to HIIT. Due to the higher peak metabolic strain induced by HIIT as well as universal preference for this modality versus aerobic exercise as reported in this study, further work testing utility of HIIT in this population is merited.

Hemodynamic and cardiorespiratory responses to various arm cycling regimens in men with spinal cord injury

“…Our findings of marked increases in oxygen uptake in response to interval training (Fig. 2) support data in men with SCI completing HIIE and SIE at 70 and 105% PPO, in which peak VO 2 during HIIE and SIE was equal to 90 and 80% VO 2 peak [27]. These results denote a substantial metabolic strain from interval exercise that exceeds the oxygen cost of circuit training [45], FES cycling [46], and exoskeleton-assisted walking [47].…”

“…Results from the graded exercise test are depicted in Table 2. VO 2 peak was equal to 1.5 ± 0.8 L/min which represents typical values in SCI [27][28][29][30].…”

IS PHYSICAL EXERCISE EFFECTIVE FOR IMPROVING VO2max IN PERSONS WITH SCI? A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

“…In the analyzed studies, there is a difference in the number of participants, where the most took part in the study of Brazg et al (2017) (n=15), while the fewest participants took part in the study of Harnish et al (2016) (n=1). Most of the studies used the ergometer as a measuring instrument for people with SCI (Bougenot et al, 2003;DeGroot et al, 2003;Widman et al, 2006;Lindberg et al, 2012;Astorino & Thum, 2016;Harnish et al, 2016), while the remaining two studies did not have a test protocol which included the ergometer (Brazg et al, 2017;Skuĉas, 2018). The minimum duration of the training program was detected in Widman et al (2006), 20 min, while the longer duration of the training program was detected in Skuĉas (2018), 2h.…”

“…In two studies, the participants were men (Bouget et al, 2003;Harnish et al, 2016), and five studies included participants of both sexes (DeGroot et al, 2003;Widman et al, 2006;Lindberg et al, 2012;Astorino & Thum, 2016;Brazg et al, 2017). On the other hand, as far as the research design is concerned, only one study had a control and experimental group of participants (Skuĉas, 2018), while the other studies did not have (Bougenot et al, 2003;DeGroot et al, 2003;Widman et al, 2006;Lindberg et al, 2012;Astorino & Thum, 2016;Harnish et al, 2016;Brazg et al, 2017). As for the duration of the experimental program, the studies differed in terms of the duration of the training.…”

“…As for the duration of the experimental program, the studies differed in terms of the duration of the training. In one study (Astorino & Thum, 2016), the training program lasted for at least two to three weeks, while in another study (Widman et al, 2016), the training program lasted for a total of 16 weeks.…”