挪威科技大学Ulrik Wisløff团队研究了五年运动训练对老年人全因死亡率的影响。2020年10月10日，该研究发表在《英国医学杂志》上。

为了评估五年监督运动训练与体育锻炼建议对老年人死亡率（70-77岁）的影响，研究组在挪威进行了一项随机对照试验，最终招募了1936-1942年间出生的1567名老年人。

将这些参与者随机分配，其中400例接受每周两次的高强度间歇训练（约90％的峰值心率，HIIT组），387例接受中等强度连续训练（约70％的峰值心率，MICT），780例遵循国家体育锻炼准则（对照组），为期五年。主要结局为全因死亡。

1567名参与者中有790名女性，平均年龄为72.8岁。87.5%的参与者报告称总体健康状况良好，其中80%的参与者报告其身体活动水平处于中等或较高水平。对照组与MICT和HIIT治疗组之间的全因死亡率没有差异。

对照组的观察死亡率为4.7%，HIIT治疗后绝对风险降低了1.7个百分点，MICT治疗后的绝对风险增加了1.2个百分点。HIIT组与MICT组相比，全因死亡的绝对风险降低了2.9个百分点。与MICT相比，对照组参与者更倾向于选择HIIT运动训练。

研究结果表明，与推荐的体育锻炼水平相比，MICT和HIIT对全因死亡率均无影响。但与对照组和MICT组相比，HIIT组有降低死亡率的趋势。

附：英文原文

Title: Effect of exercise training for five years on all cause mortality in older adults—the Generation 100 study: randomised controlled trial

Author: Dorthe Stensvold, Hallgeir Viken, Sigurd L Steinshamn, Hvard Dalen, Asbjrn Stylen, Jan P Loennechen, Line S Reitlo, Nina Zisko, Fredrik H Bkkerud, Atefe R Tari, Silvana B Sandbakk, Trude Carlsen, Jan E Ingebrigtsen, Stian Lydersen, Erney Mattsson, Sigmund A Anderssen, Maria A Fiatarone Singh, Jeff S Coombes, Eirik Skogvoll, Lars J Vatten, Jorunn L Helbostad, ivind Rognmo, Ulrik Wislff

Issue&Volume: 2020/10/07

Abstract:

Objective To evaluate the effect of five years of supervised exercise training compared with recommendations for physical activity on mortality in older adults (70-77 years).

Design Randomised controlled trial.

Setting General population of older adults in Trondheim, Norway.

Participants 1567 of 6966 individuals born between 1936 and 1942.

Intervention Participants were randomised to two sessions weekly of high intensity interval training at about 90% of peak heart rate (HIIT, n=400), moderate intensity continuous training at about 70% of peak heart rate (MICT, n=387), or to follow the national guidelines for physical activity (n=780; control group); all for five years.

Main outcome measure All cause mortality. An exploratory hypothesis was that HIIT lowers mortality more than MICT.

Results Mean age of the 1567 participants (790 women) was 72.8 (SD 2.1) years. Overall, 87.5% of participants reported to have overall good health, with 80% reporting medium or high physical activity levels at baseline. All cause mortality did not differ between the control group and combined MICT and HIIT group. When MICT and HIIT were analysed separately, with the control group as reference (observed mortality of 4.7%), an absolute risk reduction of 1.7 percentage points was observed after HIIT (hazard ratio 0.63, 95% confidence interval 0.33 to 1.20) and an absolute increased risk of 1.2 percentage points after MICT (1.24, 0.73 to 2.10). When HIIT was compared with MICT as reference group an absolute risk reduction of 2.9 percentage points was observed (0.51, 0.25 to 1.02) for all cause mortality. Control participants chose to perform more of their physical activity as HIIT than the physical activity undertaken by participants in the MICT group. This meant that the controls achieved an exercise dose at an intensity between the MICT and HIIT groups.

Conclusion This study suggests that combined MICT and HIIT has no effect on all cause mortality compared with recommended physical activity levels. However, we observed a lower all cause mortality trend after HIIT compared with controls and MICT.

DOI: 10.1136/bmj.m3485

Source: https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m3485