• Br J Sports Med · May 2019

    Meta Analysis

    Is interval training the magic bullet for fat loss? A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing moderate-intensity continuous training with high-intensity interval training (HIIT).

    • Ricardo Borges Viana, João Pedro Araújo Naves, Victor Silveira Coswig, de LiraClaudio Andre BarbosaCABhttp://orcid.org/0000-0001-5749-6877Faculty of Physical Education and Dance, Federal University of Goiás, Goiânia, Goiás, Brazil., James Steele, James Peter Fisher, and Paulo Gentil.
    • Faculty of Physical Education and Dance, Federal University of Goiás, Goiânia, Goiás, Brazil.
    • Br J Sports Med. 2019 May 1; 53 (10): 655-664.

    ObjectivesTo compare the effects of interval training and moderate-intensity continuous training (MOD) on body adiposity in humans, and to perform subgroup analyses that consider the type and duration of interval training in different groups.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data SourcesEnglish-language, Spanish-language and Portuguese-language searches of the electronic databases PubMed and Scopus were conducted from inception to 11 December 2017.Eligibility Criteria For Selecting StudiesStudies that met the following criteria were included: (1) original articles, (2) human trials, (3) minimum exercise training duration of 4 weeks, and (4) directly or indirectly compared interval training with MOD as the primary or secondary aim.ResultsOf the 786 studies found, 41 and 36 were included in the qualitative analysis and meta-analysis, respectively. Within-group analyses showed significant reductions in total body fat percentage (%) (interval training: -1.50 [95% CI -2.14 to -0.86, p<0.00001] and MOD: -1.44 [95% CI -2.00 to -0.89, p<0.00001]) and in total absolute fat mass (kg) (interval training: -1.58 [95% CI -2.74 to -0.43, p=0.007] and MOD: -1.13 [95% CI -2.18 to -0.08, p=0.04]), with no significant differences between interval training and MOD for total body fat percentage reduction (-0.23 [95% CI -1.43 to 0.97], p=0.705). However, there was a significant difference between the groups in total absolute fat mass (kg) reduction (-2.28 [95% CI -4.00 to -0.56], p=0.0094). Subgroup analyses comparing sprint interval training (SIT) with MOD protocols favour SIT for loss of total absolute fat mass (kg) (-3.22 [95% CI -5.71 to -0.73], p=0.01). Supervised training, walking/running/jogging, age (<30 years), study quality and intervention duration (<12 weeks) favourably influence the decreases in total absolute fat mass (kg) observed from interval training programmes; however, no significant effect was found on total body fat percentage (%). No effect of sex or body mass index was observed on total absolute fat mass (kg) or total body fat percentage (%).ConclusionInterval training and MOD both reduce body fat percentage (%). Interval training provided 28.5% greater reductions in total absolute fat mass (kg) than MOD.Trial Registration NumberCRD42018089427.© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…