High-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training
High-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training has been studied in 1 paper since 2026: 1 trial in people; 1 in the past year. The newest paper, Oct 26, 2026: “Impact of different exercise training modalities on patient-reported outcomes in heart failure with reduced and preserved ejection fraction”.
1 paper studies it1 findingUpdated
1 new paper in 30 daysSee all 1 papers on high-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training
At a glance
The findings reach people, from one lab or study. 1 lab in 1 country.
“KCCQ-OSS improved modestly across all groups, without differences in change over time between training modalities (p for time*group=0.53).”
- 1 lab in 1 country
- Human trial1
Studies in people
1 study gave high-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training to people and measured what changed.
| What changed | Design | People | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
no change: Has no effect on kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary score | Randomized trial3 months | 367 peopleBothHFrEF: mean 61 years; HFpEF: mean 67 yearsMidlife adults; Older adults; Heart failure with reduced or preserved ejection fraction; comparison between training modalities | ESC Congress 2026 abstract, Oct 26, 2026 |
What did studies of high-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training find?
1Studies of high-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training measured one outcome, kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary score.
Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary score
no changein humans1
1 study
Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary score
no changein humans1
High-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training showed no clear effect on kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary score in humans.
“KCCQ-OSS improved modestly across all groups, without differences in change over time between training modalities (p for time*group=0.53).”
Human trialHeart failure with reduced or preserved ejection fraction; comparison between training modalitiessupervised3 monthsn = 367
ESC Congress 2026 abstract