Dataset Information

Process evaluation of school-based high-intensity interval training interventions for children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Several systematic reviews have been published to investigate the effectiveness of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) in schools. However, there has been limited attention given to understanding the functioning of the intervention processes, which is of paramount importance for interpreting and translating the intervention effectiveness. The aim of this systematic review is to determine the extent to which process evaluation is measured in school-based HIIT interventions and to explore the effects of process evaluation and intervention characteristics on cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF), body composition, muscular strength, and blood pressure.

Methods

A comprehensive search was conducted in SPORT Discus (EBSCOhost), Web of Science, Scopus, Medline (Ovid) and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The extent to which process evaluation is measured was narratively reported, alongside with the guidance of process evaluation of complex interventions by UK Medical Research Council. Meta-analyses and meta-regressions were conducted to determine the effects of process evaluation and intervention characteristics to the intervention outcomes.

Results

The literature search identified 77 studies reporting on 45 school-based HIIT interventions. In total, five interventions reported process evaluation in a section or in a separate study, and only one intervention adopted a process evaluation framework. On average, 6 out of 12 process evaluation measures were reported in all interventions. Subgroup analyses did not indicate any beneficial treatment effects for studies with process evaluation group, whereas all pooled data and studies without process evaluation group showed significant improvement for CRF and body composition.

Conclusion

Process evaluation is frequently omitted in the literature of school-based HIIT in children and adolescents. Although reporting of process evaluation measures may not directly associate with better intervention outcomes, it allows accurate interpretation of intervention outcomes, thereby enhancing the generalisability and dissemination of the interventions.

SUBMITTER: Liu Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10835840 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Process evaluation of school-based high-intensity interval training interventions for children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Liu Yong Y Wadey Curtis A CA Barker Alan R AR Williams Craig A CA

BMC public health 20240202 1

<h4>Background</h4>Several systematic reviews have been published to investigate the effectiveness of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) in schools. However, there has been limited attention given to understanding the functioning of the intervention processes, which is of paramount importance for interpreting and translating the intervention effectiveness. The aim of this systematic review is to determine the extent to which process evaluation is measured in school-based HIIT interventions ...[more]

PMID: 38308213

Similar Datasets

Project description:Purpose1) To investigate the effectiveness of school-based high-intensity interval training (HIIT) interventions in promoting health outcomes of children and adolescents compared with either a control group or other exercise modality; and 2) to explore the intervention characteristics and process outcomes of published school-based HIIT interventions.MethodsWe searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science from inception until 31 March 2021. Studies were eligible if 1) participants aged 5-17 years old; 2) a HIIT intervention within a school setting ≥ 2 weeks duration; 3) a control or comparative exercise group; 4) health-related, cognitive, physical activity, nutrition, or program evaluation outcomes; and 5) original research published in English. We conducted meta-analyses between HIIT and control groups for all outcomes with ≥ 4 studies and meta-regressions for all outcomes with ≥ 10 studies. We narratively synthesised results between HIIT and comparative exercise groups.ResultsFifty-four papers met eligibility criteria, encompassing 42 unique studies (35 randomised controlled trials; 36 with a high risk of bias). Meta-analyses indicated significant improvements in waist circumference (mean difference (MD) = -2.5cm), body fat percentage (MD = -1.7%), body mass index (standardised mean difference (SMD) = -1.0), cardiorespiratory fitness (SMD = +1.0), resting heart rate (MD = -5bpm), homeostatic model assessment-insulin resistance (MD = -0.7), and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (SMD = -0.9) for HIIT compared to the control group. Our narrative synthesis indicated mixed findings between HIIT and other comparative exercise groups.ConclusionSchool-based HIIT is effective for improving several health outcomes. Future research should address the paucity of information on physical activity and nutrition outcomes and focus on the integration and long-term effectiveness of HIIT interventions within school settings.Trial registration numberPROSPERO CRD42018117567.

Project description:Introduction: Over the last decade, research into the impact of school-based high-intensity interval training (HIIT) on young people's health has markedly increased. Despite this, most authors have focused on the outcomes of their intervention, rather than the process of how the study was conducted. The aim of our study, therefore, was to conduct a mixed methods process evaluation of Project FFAB (Fun Fast Activity Blasts), a school-based HIIT intervention for adolescents. The objectives were to explore study recruitment, reach, intervention dose, fidelity, participants' experiences, context, and future implementation. Methods: Recruitment was assessed by comparing the number of students who received study information, to those who provided consent. Reach was described as the number of participants who completed the intervention. Dose was reported via the number of HIIT sessions delivered, total exercise time commitment, HIIT exercise time, and session attendance. Post-intervention focus groups were conducted with intervention participants (n = 33; aged 14.1 ± 0.3 years; mean ± standard deviation). These discussions explored aspects of intervention fidelity (extent that the intervention was delivered as intended); participants' experiences of the HIIT sessions; context (exploration of the nuances of school-based HIIT); and ideas for future implementation. Results: Recruitment, reach, and dose data indicate that Project FFAB was largely delivered as planned. Focus group data identified a mismatch between perceived vs. prescribed work: rest ratio for the multi-activity HIIT drills. Generally, the HIIT drills were well-received; participants often reported they were fun to complete, and the use of heart rate monitors was helpful for interpreting exercise intensity. Some participants stated that greater variety in the HIIT drills would be preferable. The timing and structure of the HIIT sessions that took place outside of physical education lessons received mixed responses. Conclusion: Collectively, our study supports the use of school-based HIIT and provides valuable insights into how such interventions can be implemented. Project FFAB could be modified to account for individuals' preferences on when the exercise sessions took place. In addition, a wider range of activities could be included, and the prescribed work: rest ratio of the HIIT drills could be better communicated.

Project description:IntroductionSince adolescents with obesity are prone to bone fragility during weight loss, the aim was to compare the impact of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) versus moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) on bone density, geometry, and strength.MethodsSixty-one adolescents were randomly assigned to 2 cycling trainings (HIIT and MICT) and a control (CTR, without training) group. Anthropometry, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry with hip structural analysis and the trabecular bone score (TBS) were assessed before and after the 16-week intervention.ResultsBody mass index (BMI) and fat mass (FM) percentage decreased at T1 versus T0 in both training groups (p < 0.001 for HIIT, p = 0.01 for MICT), though to a larger extent in HIIT (p < 0.05). Total body bone mineral density (BMD) and bone mineral content (BMC) increased in both training groups (p < 0.001), but to a greater extent in HIIT for BMC (p < 0.05). Lumbar spine BMD and BMC increased in both training groups (p < 0.001 for HIIT, p < 0.01 for MICT), with a time × group interaction between HIIT and CTR (p < 0.05) only. TBS increased in both training groups (p < 0.01 for HIIT, p < 0.05 for MICT). Hip BMD and BMC increased in both HIIT (p < 0.001 and p < 0.01) and MICT (p < 0.01 and p < 0.05). At the narrow neck (NN), endocortical diameter, width (p < 0.01), cross-sectional moment of inertia, and section modulus (Z) (p < 0.05) increased only in the HIIT group, such as BMD and Z (p < 0.05) at the intertrochanteric region (IT) and average cortical thickness (p < 0.001) and width (p < 0.05) at the femoral shaft. At the NN and IT, the buckling ratio decreased only in the HIIT group (p < 0.05), predicting higher resistance to fracture.ConclusionsIn addition to inducing greater BMI and FM percentage decreases in comparison to MICT, HIIT improves multisite bone density, geometry, and strength, which heighten the justification for HIIT as part of weight loss interventions in adolescents with obesity.

Dataset Information

Process evaluation of school-based high-intensity interval training interventions for children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Process evaluation of school-based high-intensity interval training interventions for children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets