Effect of high-intensity interval training on cardiometabolic component risks in persons with paraplegia: Results of a randomized controlled trial.

Matthew Farrow, Jennifer Maher, Rachel Deere, Bruno Spellanzon, Sean Williams, Dylan Thompson, James L J Bilzon

Journal: Experimental physiology 2024;109(8):1253-1266

PMID: 38924175

Plain Language Summary

plain language summary logo

People with chronic paraplegia (spinal cord injuries) have a 3 times higher mortality from cardiovascular disease than the general population, which is associated with a higher prevalence of risk factors including central obesity, impaired glucose tolerance, dyslipidaemia and chronic inflammation. The aim of this randomised controlled trial was to evaluate the effects of upper body high-intensity interval training (HIIT) on cardiometabolic risk factors. 18 patients were included in the HIIT group who were asked to carry out 4 upper body HIIT sessions per week at home for 6 weeks, whilst the 9 patients in the control group were asked to maintain their habitual diet and activity regimes. Following the 6-week intervention, the HIIT group presented with significantly improved peak power output and postprandial insulin sensitivity compared to the control group. There were no significant differences between groups for all other outcomes: oral glucose tolerance test, HOMA2-IR, glucose, blood lipids, leptin, adiponectin, C-reactive protein, blood pressure, anthropometric parameters, health-related quality of life, fatigue and functional independence.

Abstract

The aim of this work is to determine the effect of upper-body high intensity interval training (HIIT) on cardiometabolic risks in individuals with chronic paraplegia. Twenty-seven individuals (14 females, 13 males, mean ± SD age: 46 ± 9 years) with chronic paraplegia (spinal cord injury between T2 and L5 >1-year post-injury) took part in a randomized controlled trial and were included in the final analysis. Participants in the HIIT group (n = 18) performed ∼30 min of arm crank exercise (60 s intervals at 80%-90% peak heart rate) four times per week, for 6 weeks. Participants in the control (CON) group (n = 9) were asked to maintain their habitual diet and physical activity patterns over the study period. Outcome measures were taken at baseline and follow-up. The primary outcome measures were fasting insulin, peak power output (PPO) and peak aerobic capacity ( ). Secondary outcome measures included body composition, postprandial glycaemic control, fasting blood lipids, inflammatory biomarkers and resting blood pressure. Differences between groups were assessed by ANCOVA, using baseline values as a covariate. PPO was higher in the HIIT (101 W, 97-106) compared to the CON (90 W, 83-96) group at follow-up (P = 0.006). There were no differences in fasting insulin (P = 0.415) or relative (P = 0.417). Postprandial Matsuda insulin sensitivity index (ISI) was higher in the HIIT (5.42, 4.69-6.15) compared to the CON (3.75, 2.46-5.04) group at follow-up (P = 0.036). Six weeks of upper-body HIIT increased PPO and ISI, with no other beneficial effect on cardiometabolic component risks in persons with chronic paraplegia. HIGHLIGHTS: What is the central question of this study? What is the effect of upper-body high intensity interval training (HIIT) on cardiometabolic component risks in individuals with chronic paraplegia? What is the main finding and its importance? Six weeks of upper-body HIIT increased PPO and improved insulin sensitivity, but had no beneficial effect on other cardiometabolic component risks in persons with chronic paraplegia. The large effect size observed for insulin sensitivity may be important in terms of reducing the risk of type-2 diabetes in this population.

© 2024 The Author(s). Experimental Physiology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Physiological Society.

Address: Department for Health, University of Bath, Bath, UK.; Centre for Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism (CNEM), University of Bath, Bath, UK.; Department of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.; Department for Health, University of Bath, Bath, UK.; Centre for Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism (CNEM), University of Bath, Bath, UK.; Department for Health, University of Bath, Bath, UK.; Centre for Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism (CNEM), University of Bath, Bath, UK.; Centre for Trials Research, College of Biomedical & Life Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.; Department for Health, University of Bath, Bath, UK.

Link outs

Bant logo

© Copyright 2026, Nutrition Evidence

NED wishes to thank the following organisations for their support:

We use cookies to improve your experience and analyze site traffic with Google Analytics. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more.