scholarly journals T147. CAN HIGH INTENSITY INTERVAL TRAINING (HIIT) IMPROVE PHYSICAL AND MENTAL HEALTH OUTCOMES? A META-REVIEW OF THE GLOBAL BENEFITS OF HIIT AND FOCUSED SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF THE EFFECTS OF HIIT IN MENTAL DISORDERS

2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S286-S287
Author(s):  
Rebecca Martland ◽  
Brendon Stubbs ◽  
Fiona Gaughran

Abstract Background High intensity interval training (HIIT) has been shown to improve physical and mental health in healthy individuals and those with physical illnesses, such as cardiovascular and cardiometabolic diseases. Initial work has shown that HIIT may have similar benefits in people experiencing mental illnesses including schizophrenia. Thus, it has been proposed that HIIT may be a promising exercise intervention that has the potential to target the poor health of those with mental illnesses. Despite the rapid interest in HIIT, there is a lack of clarity in the totality of the evidence for which outcomes and under what regimes HIIT is effective and safe, both in populations with and without mental illnesses. Methods A review of the literature was undertaken, comprising a) a meta-review investigating HIIT in all populations and all health outcomes to identify the global health benefits of HIIT; b) a traditional systematic review of all individual interventions of HIIT in all mental disorders (including schizophrenia), to see specifically what has been done in mental health populations. Firstly, major databases were searched for systematic reviews (with/without meta-analyses) of randomised & non-randomised trials that compared HIIT to a control in any human population. Findings were summarised narratively. Secondly, major databases were searched for intervention studies investigating HIIT among people with mental illnesses. Findings were summarised narratively, and a preliminary meta-analysis was undertaken. Results Regarding our first search, 33 systematic reviews (including 25 meta-analyses) were retrieved encompassing healthy subjects and people with physical health complications. Evidence suggested HIIT improved cardiorespiratory fitness (21/23, 91% systematic reviews), arterial compliance and vascular function (3/5, 60% systematic reviews), cardiac function (2/3, 67%), muscle mass (2/3, 67%), quality of life (2/4, 50%) exercise capacity (2/3, 67%) and inflammatory markers (3/5, 60% reviews), versus control. Improvements in muscular structure, anxiety and depression, and blood pressure were seen, compared to pre-training. Additionally, no acute injuries were reported, and mean adherence rates surpassed 80% in most systematic reviews. Regarding our second search, 12 intervention studies, (including 7 RCTs), were included encompassing Major Depressive Disorder, Schizophrenia-Spectrum Disorders, Bipolar Disorder, Substance Use Disorder, Panic Disorder and ADHD. Evidence suggested HIIT improved cardiorespiratory fitness (5/8 intervention studies, 63%), anthropometric variables (3/4, 75%), mental health outcomes (9/12, 75%), cardiovascular fitness (5/9, 56%), physical fitness (1/1, 100%) and motor skills (1/1, 100%), compare to pre-training. The preliminary meta-analysis of pre-post changes found HIIT increased High-Density-Lipoprotein (SMD:0.373 [95%CI 0.18; 0.57], p=0.0002) and possibly reduced general psychopathology (SMD:-1.58 [95%CI -3.35; 0.18], p=0.08) in people with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders. HIIT reduced depression severity (Standardised mean difference (SMD):-1.36 [95%CI-1.63;-1.089], p<0.0001) and possibly improved VO2max (SMD:0.18 [95%CI -0.02; 0.37], p=0.08) in people with depression. No acute injuries were reported, mean adherence to HIIT sessions ranged from 64–94%, and dropout ranged from 0–50%. Discussion HIIT appears to be associated with multiple benefits in healthy subjects and people with physical health complications. HIIT may also improve a range of physical and mental health outcomes among people with mental illnesses including schizophrenia. Nonetheless, high-quality well-powered trials are needed to reaffirm these findings.

2015 ◽  
Vol 45 (7) ◽  
pp. 1343-1361 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Firth ◽  
J. Cotter ◽  
R. Elliott ◽  
P. French ◽  
A. R. Yung

BackgroundThe typically poor outcomes of schizophrenia could be improved through interventions that reduce cardiometabolic risk, negative symptoms and cognitive deficits; aspects of the illness which often go untreated. The present review and meta-analysis aimed to establish the effectiveness of exercise for improving both physical and mental health outcomes in schizophrenia patients.MethodWe conducted a systematic literature search to identify all studies that examined the physical or mental effects of exercise interventions in non-affective psychotic disorders. Of 1581 references, 20 eligible studies were identified. Data on study design, sample characteristics, outcomes and feasibility were extracted from all studies and systematically reviewed. Meta-analyses were also conducted on the physical and mental health outcomes of randomized controlled trials.ResultsExercise interventions had no significant effect on body mass index, but can improve physical fitness and other cardiometabolic risk factors. Psychiatric symptoms were significantly reduced by interventions using around 90 min of moderate-to-vigorous exercise per week (standardized mean difference: 0.72, 95% confidence interval −1.14 to −0.29). This amount of exercise was also reported to significantly improve functioning, co-morbid disorders and neurocognition.ConclusionsInterventions that implement a sufficient dose of exercise, in supervised or group settings, can be feasible and effective interventions for schizophrenia.


2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marlee Bower ◽  
Scarlett Smout ◽  
Amarina Donohoe-Bales ◽  
Lily Teesson ◽  
Eleisha Lauria ◽  
...  

Introduction: Vast available international evidence has investigated the mental health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. This review aims to synthesise evidence, identifying populations and characteristics associated with poor mental health.Methods: A meta-review of pooled prevalence of anxiety and depression, with subgroup analyses for the general population, healthcare workers (HCW) and COVID-19 patients; and a meta-synthesis of systematic reviews to collate evidence on associated factors and further mental disorders. Databases searched included Scopus, Embase, PsycINFO, and MEDLINE dated to May 2021. Eligibility criteria included systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses, published post-November 2019, reporting data in English on mental health outcomes during the pandemic.Results: Eighty-one systematic reviews were included, 51 of which incorporated meta-analysis. Meta-review overall anxiety prevalence was 29% (95%CI: 27–31%, I2: 99.83%), with subgroup prevalence as 35% (95%CI: 23–47%, I2: 97.4%) in COVID-19 patients, 29% in HCW (95%CI: 25– 32, I2: 99.8%) and 28% in the general population (95%CI: 25–31%, I2: 99.9%). Meta-review overall depression prevalence was 28% (95%CI: 26–30%, I2: 99.7), with subgroup prevalence as 30% (95%CI: 7–60%, I2: 99.8%) in COVID-19 patients, 28% (95%CI: 25–31%, I2: 99.7%) in HCW and 27% (95%CI: 25–30, I2: 99.8%) in the general population. Meta-synthesis found many experienced psychological distress and PTSD/PTSS during COVID-19, but pooled prevalence ranged substantially. Fear of, proximity to, or confirmed COVID-19 infection; undergoing quarantine; and COVID-19-related news exposure were associated with adverse mental health outcomes. Amongst other factors, people who are younger, female, LGBTIQ, pregnant, parents or experiencing low social support, financial issues or socio-economic disadvantage, tended to have poorer mental health during the pandemic period.Conclusions: Despite high volumes of reviews, the diversity of findings and dearth of longitudinal studies within reviews means clear links between COVID-19 and mental health are not available, although existing evidence indicates probable associations.


2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (4) ◽  
pp. 498-525 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael M. Gale ◽  
Alex L. Pieterse ◽  
Debbiesiu L. Lee ◽  
Kiet Huynh ◽  
Shantel Powell ◽  
...  

Internalized racism represents a critical component of the system of racial oppression wherein People of Color adopt the negative beliefs about their race held by members of the White majority group. In this meta-analysis, the authors reviewed 29 studies (32 effect sizes) on the relationships between internalized racism and negative physical and mental health outcomes published between 1999 and 2015 and tested for literature-driven moderator effects using subgroup analyses. Results suggested that the direct overall relation between internalized racism and health was strongest for negative mental health outcomes ( r = .26), followed by negative physical health outcomes ( r = .11). Significant moderator effects were found for scale of measurement, country of sample (United States vs. international), and sampling method. Moderator effects of gender, publication type, year, and sample setting were not statistically significant. These findings are discussed and their implications for practice, advocacy, education/training, and research are described.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. e042335
Author(s):  
Nexhmedin Morina ◽  
Ahlke Kip ◽  
Thole Hilko Hoppen ◽  
Stefan Priebe ◽  
Thomas Meyer

BackgroundThe imperative for physical distancing (mostly referred to as social distancing) during COVID-19 pandemic may deteriorate physical and mental health. We aimed at summarising the strength of evidence in the published literature on the association of physical and mental health with social connection via social isolation, living alone and loneliness.MethodsWe conducted a systematic search in April 2020 to identify meta-analyses using the Medline, PsycINFO and Web of Science databases. The search strategy included terms of social isolation, loneliness, living alone and meta-analysis. Eligible meta-analyses needed to report any sort of association between an indicator of social connection and any physical or mental health outcome. The findings were summarised in a narrative synthesis.ResultsTwenty-five meta-analyses met our criteria, of which 10 focused on physical health and 15 on mental health outcomes. The results suggest that lack of social connection is associated with chronic physical symptoms, frailty, coronary heart disease, malnutrition, hospital readmission, reduced vaccine uptake, early mortality, depression, social anxiety, psychosis, cognitive impairment in later life and suicidal ideation.ConclusionsThe existing evidence clearly indicates that social connection is associated with a range of poor physical and mental health outcomes. A potential negative impact on these outcomes needs to be considered in future decisions on physical distancing measures.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document