Cited by 414Cardiovascular and exercise physiologyCardiac Health and Mental HealthHeart Failure Treatment and Management

High-Intensity Interval Training in Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction

Open access
Ellingsen, Øyvind, Halle, Martin, Conraads, Viviane, Støylen, Asbjørn, Dalen, Håvard, Delagardelle, Charles, Larsen, Alf-Inge, Hole, Torstein +20 more·2017·Circulation

Abstract

Background: Small studies have suggested that high-intensity interval training (HIIT) is superior to moderate continuous training (MCT) in reversing cardiac remodeling and increasing aerobic capacity in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. The present multicenter trial compared 12 weeks of supervised interventions of HIIT, MCT, or a recommendation of regular exercise (RRE). Methods: Two hundred sixty-one patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% and New York Heart Association class II to III were randomly assigned to HIIT at 90% to 95% of maximal heart rate, MCT at 60% to 70% of maximal heart rate, or RRE. Thereafter, patients were encouraged to continue exercising on their own. Clinical assessments were performed at baseline, after the intervention, and at follow-up after 52 weeks. Primary end point was a between-group comparison of change in left ventricular end-diastolic diameter from baseline to 12 weeks. Results: Groups did not differ in age (median, 60 years), sex (19% women), ischemic pathogenesis (59%), or medication. Change in left ventricular end-diastolic diameter from baseline to 12 weeks was not different between HIIT and MCT ( P =0.45); left ventricular end-diastolic diameter changes compared with RRE were −2.8 mm (−5.2 to −0.4 mm; P =0.02) in HIIT and −1.2 mm (−3.6 to 1.2 mm; P =0.34) in MCT. There was also no difference between HIIT and MCT in peak oxygen uptake ( P =0.70), but both were superior to RRE. However, none of these changes was maintained at follow-up after 52 weeks. Serious adverse events were not statistically different during supervised intervention or at follow-up at 52 weeks (HIIT, 39%; MCT, 25%; RRE, 34%; P =0.16). Training records showed that 51% of patients exercised below prescribed target during supervised HIIT and 80% above target in MCT. Conclusions: HIIT was not superior to MCT in changing left ventricular remodeling or aerobic capacity, and its feasibility remains unresolved in patients with heart failure. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00917046.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/circulationaha.116.022924

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Only 20% of the HIIT group in that study exercised at the prescribed intensity, making it difficult to draw firm conclusions.

    “However, only 20% of the HIIT group in that study exercised at the prescribed intensity, making it difficult to draw firm conclusions.”

    From Effect of exercise training for five years on all cause mortality in older adults—the Generation 100 study: randomised controlled trial (2020) · cites this paper as [26]

    The Results section (Training Intensity Compared With Protocol Targets; page not provided) reports that 51% of HIIT patients exercised below the prescribed intensity, but does not establish that only 20% exercised within the prescribed range. The Discussion describes difficulty achieving the target intensity, and the Conclusions call for further studies, supporting the caution about firm conclusions. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Compared to other studies, the drop-out rate over the five year study period was low, and the adherence to prescribed exercise was relatively high.

    “Compared to other studies,25 26 the drop-out rate over the five years study period was low, and the adherence to prescribed exercise was relatively high.”

    From Effect of exercise training for five years on all cause mortality in older adults—the Generation 100 study: randomised controlled trial (2020) · cites this paper as [26]

    The Results section ('Patient Population and Adherence to Intervention'; page unavailable) reports few withdrawals and high adherence to supervised exercise: a median of 35 of 36 sessions in the two training groups. But those figures cover a 12-week intervention, with follow-up to 52 weeks—not a five-year period. The paper therefore supports the comparison only in a shorter-term setting. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Other studies on the effect of exercise on morbidity and mortality include combined lifestyle interventions and populations with diseases and have fewer monitored and relatively short periods of supervised exercise.

    “Other studies on the effect of exercise on morbidity and mortality include combined lifestyle interventions24 and populations with diseases25 26 and have fewer monitored and relatively short periods of supervised exercise.26 27”

    From Effect of exercise training for five years on all cause mortality in older adults—the Generation 100 study: randomised controlled trial (2020) · cites this paper as [26]

    The Methods (Patients and Interventions) describe patients with chronic heart failure and a 12-week supervised exercise program; the Results (Patient Population and Adherence to Intervention) report 36 possible supervised sessions for the training groups. The Methods (End Points) show that deaths and hospitalizations were tracked, but the paper does not establish that it had fewer monitored sessions than the studies to which the citing sentence compares it. It also states in the Methods (Statistical Analysis) that it was not powered to assess differences in clinical events. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Although high intensity training has now been incorporated in most public health recommendations, the long term effect, feasibility, and safety have recently been questioned.

    “Although high intensity training, which HIIT represents, has now been incorporated in most public health recommendations, the long term effect, feasibility, and safety have recently been questioned.26 42 43”

    From Effect of exercise training for five years on all cause mortality in older adults—the Generation 100 study: randomised controlled trial (2020) · cites this paper as [26]

    The Discussion and Conclusions (pages not provided) raise questions about HIIT’s feasibility, durability of benefit, and safety in patients with heart failure: many patients did not reach the prescribed intensity, improvements were not maintained at 52 weeks, and the trial was too small to assess safety. The paper does not establish that high-intensity training is included in most public-health recommendations, and its findings concern patients with heart failure rather than the general public. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • One study in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction observed no difference in cardiovascular disease events between HIIT and MICT groups after 52 weeks of follow-up.

    “One study in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction observed no difference in cardiovascular disease events between HIIT and MICT groups after 52 weeks of follow-up.26”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ellingsen, Ø., Halle, M., Conraads, V., Støylen, A., Dalen, H., Delagardelle, C., Larsen, A.-I., Hole, T., Mezzani, A., Van Craenenbroeck, E. M., Videm, V., Beckers, P., Christle, J. W., Winzer, E., Mangner, N., Woitek, F., Höllriegel, R., Pressler, A., Monk-Hansen, T., Snoer, M., Feiereisen, P., Valborgland, T., Kjekshus, J., Hambrecht, R., Gielen, S., Karlsen, T., Prescott, E., & Linke, A.
Affiliations
  • Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NO)
  • From St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Norway (Ø.E., A.S., H.D., V.V., T.K.); K.G. Jebsen Center for Exercise in Medicine, Department of Circulation and Medical Imaging, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway (Ø.E., H.D., T.K.); Department of Prevention, Rehabilitation and Sports Medicine, Technische Universität München, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Germany (M.H., J.W.C., A.P.); DZHK (German Center for Cardiovascular Research), Partner Site Munich Heart...
Corresponding author
Ellingsen, Øyvind
Venue
Circulation
Published
2017-02-28
Volume
135
Issue
9
Pages
839-849
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2621044226
Cited by
414
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 34 · 2025: 38 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 44 · 2022: 42 · 2021: 45 · 2020: 44 · 2019: 44 · 2018: 50 · 2017: 37
FWCI
70.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-nd
Locations
  • Circulation (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • BIBSYS Brage (BIBSYS (Norway)) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • mediaTUM (Technical University of Munich) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Norges Teknisk-Naturvitenskapelige Universitet
  • Universitetet i Oslo
  • Fondazione Salvatore Maugeri
  • Universität Leipzig
  • Bispebjerg Hospital
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Health and Mental Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Failure Treatment and Management
Keywords
high-intensity interval training, heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, moderate-intensity continuous training, left ventricular remodeling, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter, cardiorespiratory fitness, peak oxygen uptake, exercise training, supervised exercise intervention, exercise adherence, adverse events
MeSH terms
High-Intensity Interval Training, Aged, Echocardiography, Exercise Test, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Heart Failure, Heart Rate, Heart Ventricles, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Quality of Life, Stroke Volume, Exercise Tolerance, Ventricular Remodeling

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review