Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2006;333:1265 (16 December), doi:10.1136/bmj.333.7581.1265-a
|
Ninety eight men and women with severe pulmonary disease undertook a three week rehabilitation programme including 15 sessions of continuous high intensity or interval exercise on a bicycle ergometer. Improvements in quality of life and exercise capacity as measured by the six minute walking test were similar in both groups (difference between continuous and interval groups 1.1 m, 95% CI 25.4 to 27.6). But those doing the interval exercise were less likely to drop out (52.1% v 76%, P=0.014) and needed fewer unscheduled breaks (median 2 v 11, P=0.023).
The researchers deliberately designed their trial to test whether interval exercise was "non inferior" to intensive exercise, and it was. So doctors and patients can now choose their preferred programme, knowing that both work well but one is easier than the other.
In this study, patients doing continuous exercise worked at 70% of their maximum capacity for 20 minutes at a time. Patients in the interval group worked more intensively, but only for 20 seconds out of each minute. They spent the other 40 seconds recovering.