A systematic review and cluster analysis approach of 103 studies of high-intensity interval training on cardiorespiratory fitness.

Aims: This study aims to systematically review the systematic reviews and meta-analyses examining the effect of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) protocols on improving cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) and to characterize the main patterns of HIIT modalities using clustering statistical procedures to examine their potential differences on improving CRF. Finally, we aimed to develop a comprehensive guideline for reporting HIIT protocols.
Methods and Results: A systematic review was conducted on PubMed and Web of Science from their inception to 31 October 2022 for systematic reviews and meta-analysis aimed at assessing the effect of HIIT on CRF in the entire study population. The Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 tool was used to evaluate the risk of bias of each review. Additionally, a principal component analysis testing the data adequacy for the factor solution through the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin procedure test was conducted. Once the number of factors was identified, in order to identify data patterns according to the main characteristics of the HIIT protocols, a two-step cluster analysis was conducted. Nineteen systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses comprising 103 studies were included. Clustering of systematic reviews and meta-analyses identified three HIIT modalities ('HIIT-normal mixed', 'HIIT-long running', and 'HIIT-short cycling') underlying the interventions across the included studies. Similar effectiveness in increasing CRF among the three HIIT modalities was observed. Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences in CRF by sex, weight status, study design, and baseline physical activity level (P > 0.05), but differences were observed by age group, and exercise intensity indicator was used in the HIIT programmes (P < 0.05).
Conclusion: All three HIIT modalities produced significant improvements of CRF, although some modalities showed greater changes for some specific age groups or intensity indicators.
Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: none declared.
(© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)