Effects of High-Intensity Interval Training on the Parameters Related to Physical Fitness and Health of Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background As a novel and time-efficient exercise form, high-intensity interval training (HIIT) has shown great potential in improving health-related physical fitness among diverse populations. However, empirical evidence on its efficacy among the elderly has not been well summarized. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the effect of HIIT interventions on the parameters related to physical fitness and health of older adults, including resting heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF), body mass index (BMI), body fat percent (BF%), waist circumference (WC), muscular endurance (ME), muscular strength (MS), muscular power (MP), balance and flexibility, compared to non-exercise and other-exercise (e.g., moderate-intensity continuous training, resistance training) conditions. Methods Literature published from January 2000 to May 2023 was collected through extensive searches across eight databases and relevant review papers. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) featuring a minimum 2-week exercise intervention for older adults (>= 60 years) were included. The pooled effect size of Hedges'g was estimated using random-effects models in R. Meta-regression was performed for both categorical (health status, duration of training programme, and frequency) and continuous moderators (mean age, male rate, and attrition rate). Results Forty-four eligible RCTs with 1863 participants (52.1% female; 60.5-81.2 years) were included in the quantitative analysis. Compared to non-exercise condition, HIIT significantly improved resting HR (g = -0.36, 95%CI = [-0.67, -0.05], P = 0.032), SBP (g = -0.29, 95%CI = [-0.54, -0.03], P = 0.008), CRF (g = 0.77, 95%CI = [0.51, 1.04], P < 0.001), BF% (g = -0.26, 95%CI = [-0.41, -0.11], P = 0.006), MS (g = 0.47, 95%CI = [0.23, 0.71], P = 0.004), ME (g = 0.65, 95%CI = [0.10, 1.19], P = 0.036), and balance (e.g., timed-up-and-go) (g = -0.79, 95%CI = [-1.19, -0.40], P = 0.035). Compared to other-exercise condition, HIIT significantly improved resting HR (g = -0.11, 95%CI = [-0.21, -0.01], P = 0.029), SBP (g = -0.14, 95%CI = [-0.28, -0.01], P = 0.038), and CRF (g = 0.23, 95%CI = [0.07, 0.38], P = 0.008). No significant difference was found between HIIT and non-exercise condition for DBP, BMI and WC, as well as between HIIT and other-exercise condition for DBP, BMI, BF%, WC, ME, and balance (all P > 0.05). Meta-regression indicated that mean age moderated the HIIT effect on resting HR (b = -0.02, P = 0.014; HIIT vs. other-exercise condition) and SBP (b = 0.03, P = 0.048; HIIT vs. non-exercise), and attrition rate moderated the effect on CRF (b = 0.03, P = 0.007; HIIT vs. non-exercise). Conclusion This study supports the efficacy of HIIT in improving resting HR, SBP, CRF, BF%, MS, ME and balance among older adults. More empirical evidence is needed to determine the efficacy of HIIT for MP and flexibility in this population.