Feasibility of Different Exercise Modalities for Community-Dwelling Residents With Physical Inactivity: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

This was a feasibility study with small sample sizes in each arm, so the efficacy results are preliminary. No BMI or body fat percentage limits were used for inclusion, so participants were not selected for obesity or metabolic risk. 88.9% of participants were women, which may limit generalizability to men. Participants and interveners were not blinded, although the data analyst was blinded to group allocation. Each exercise group received supervised sessions twice weekly and home-based video sessions once weekly, so the supervised and home-based components cannot be separated. The aerobic-plus-resistance group received aerobic exercise plus resistance exercise, so the resistance component cannot be isolated. Diet was not recorded or controlled, and participants reported more dessert-type food intake after sessions, which may explain increases in visceral fat and body fat. Age ranged from 40 to 70 years, and the interveners found designing intensity challenging for this broad age range. No VO2max measurement was available, so energy expenditure could not be precisely compared among the three exercise groups. The control group also increased visceral adipose tissue and body fat, so fat increases were not unique to exercise.

Do not conclude that high-intensity interval training is the best exercise modality for metabolic health. The study was a small feasibility trial, each exercise group received both supervised sessions and home-based video sessions, and the interval group showed increases in visceral adipose tissue and body fat while interval training was not superior to the other exercise groups.