High-intensity interval training after stroke: A mixed-methods systematic review and meta-analysis of safety, feasibility and acceptability.

The review included 20 studies and 658 participants, so the evidence base was small. Participants were mostly male, relatively young, ambulant and chronic, with mild impairments, so the findings may not apply to more severely affected or non-ambulatory patients. Adverse event reporting was not standardised, and many studies had missing data or unclear attribution. Acceptability data were scarce, with no qualitative studies. Only one study reported cost. Only English-language published studies were included, which may have caused publication and non-reporting bias.

The authors received no financial support. One author declared royalties from a book on fitness training after stroke.

Do not conclude that high-intensity interval training improves motor recovery or fitness. This review examined safety, feasibility and acceptability, not effectiveness, and its comparisons showed no difference in adverse events or dropouts.