The intensity paradox: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of its impact on the cardiorespiratory fitness of older adults

Abstract

AbstractAimThe present systematic review and meta‐analysis aimed to compare the effect of moderate‐ versus high‐intensity aerobic exercise on cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) in older adults, taking into account the volume of exercise completed.MethodsThe databases MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), and CENTRAL (Cochrane Library) were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Two reviewers extracted data and assessed bias. Comprehensive Meta‐Analysis software calculated overall effect size, intensity differences, and performed meta‐regression analyses using pre‐to‐post intervention or change scores of peak oxygen uptake (V̇O2peak). The review included 23 RCTs with 1332 older adults (intervention group: n = 932; control group: n = 400), divided into moderate‐intensity (435 older adults) and high‐intensity (476 older adults) groups.ResultsMeta‐regression analysis showed a moderate, but not significant, relationship between exercise intensity and improvements in V̇O2peak after accounting for the completed exercise volume (β = 0.31, 95% CI = [−0.04; 0.67]). Additionally, studies comparing moderate‐ versus high‐intensity revealed a small, but not significant, effect in favor of high‐intensity (Hedges' g = 0.20, 95% CI = [−0.02; 0.41]). Finally, no significant differences in V̇O2peak improvements were found across exercise groups employing various methods, modalities, and intensity monitoring strategies.ConclusionFindings challenge the notion that high‐intensity exercise is inherently superior and indicate that regular aerobic exercise, irrespective of the specific approach and intensity, provides the primary benefits to CRF in older adults. Future RCTs should prioritize valid and reliable methodologies for monitoring and reporting exercise volume and adherence among older adults.