Effectiveness of HIIT in patients with cancer or cancer survivors: An umbrella and mapping review with meta-meta-analysis

17Citations
Citations of this article
70Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objective: To assess the available evidence on the effectiveness of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) in addition to first-choice cancer treatment on cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF), quality of life (QoL), adherence, and adverse effects of HIIT in patients with cancer or cancer survivors. Methods: An umbrella review and meta-meta-analysis (MMA) was performed. A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Database, CINAHL, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science until August 2021. Article selection, quality assessment, and risk of bias assessment were performed by two independent reviewers. The MMA were performed with a random-effects model and the summary statistics were presented in the form of forest plot with a weighted compilation of all standardized mean differences (SMD) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: Seven systematic reviews were included. Regarding CRF, the addition of HIIT to cancer treatment showed statistically significant differences with a small clinical effect, compared with adding other treatments (SMD = 0.45; 95% CI 0.24 to 0.65). There was no significant difference when compared with adding moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) (SMD = 0.23; 95% CI −0.04 to 0.50). QoL showed positive results although with some controversy. Adherence to HIIT intervention was high, ranging from 54% to 100%. Regarding adverse effects, most of the systematic reviews reported none, and in the cases in which they occurred, they were mild. Conclusion: In conjunction with first-choice cancer treatment, HIIT has been shown to be an effective intervention in terms of CRF and QoL, as well as having optimal adherence rate. In addition, the implementation of HIIT in patients with cancer or cancer survivors is safe as it showed no or few adverse effects.

References Powered by Scopus

Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries

77157Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses

49208Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions

37104Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Efficacy of Interval Training in Improving Body Composition and Adiposity in Apparently Healthy Adults: An Umbrella Review with Meta-Analysis

7Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Benefits beyond cardiometabolic health: the potential of frequent high intensity ‘exercise snacks’ to improve outcomes for those living with and beyond cancer

7Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

High-intensity interval training in breast cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

7Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Herranz-Gómez, A., Cuenca-Martínez, F., Suso-Martí, L., Varangot-Reille, C., Calatayud, J., Blanco-Díaz, M., & Casaña, J. (2022, November 1). Effectiveness of HIIT in patients with cancer or cancer survivors: An umbrella and mapping review with meta-meta-analysis. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports. John Wiley and Sons Inc. https://doi.org/10.1111/sms.14223

Readers over time

‘22‘23‘24‘2507142128

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 12

67%

Researcher 5

28%

Lecturer / Post doc 1

6%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Nursing and Health Professions 10

43%

Medicine and Dentistry 6

26%

Sports and Recreations 5

22%

Psychology 2

9%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Mentions
News Mentions: 1

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0