High Intensity Interval Training Vs Moderate Intensity Continuous Training in the Management of Metabolic Type Disease
Previously, the use of moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) has 
generally been considered the most beneficial exercise treatment modality for 
the prevention/management of metabolic type disease. More recently, however, 
high-intensity interval training (HIIT) has emerged into the clinical setting as a 
potential alternative to traditional MICT in the management of such diseases, but 
the comparative effects are not well understood. Use of HIIT has the potential 
to induce favorable physiological remodeling that is similar or even superior to 
MICT, despite a considerably lower exercise volume and time commitment. Many 
studies have therefore examined the efficacy of HIIT relative to MICT with respect 
to reducing the development and progression of numerous metabolic conditions 
including obesity, type 2 diabetes, and the metabolic syndrome. Despite this, 
however, the efficacy of HIIT relative to MICT in reversing the specific symptoms 
and adverse effects of those at risk of, or afflicted with metabolic disease is 
not well understood. Moreover, HIIT is often perceived as very stressful and 
demanding, which could potentially render it unsafe and/or unappealing for 
clinical populations whom are already at a higher risk of experiencing adverse 
events. Furthermore, the optimal prescriptive variables (volume, intensity, 
duration, rest) of a HIIT protocol that elicit the greatest benefits for each of the 
aforementioned clinical cohorts have not been established. This review article 
aims to explore the use of HIIT with respect to the above. Firstly, the efficacy of 
HIIT is examined relative to MICT in the management of metabolic diseases, with 
particular relevance to physiological adaptations, health outcomes, and potential 
mechanisms. Secondly, the potential safety issues relating to the suitability and 
tolerability of HIIT for clinical populations, as well as the optimal HIIT prescriptive 
variables for such clinical populations are discussed.