English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  HIIT has recently been widely used for health promotion in healthy people and patients with chronic diseases. Exercise can help SUD reduce drug cravings, enhance mental health and return to normal life. However, whether HIIT can bring better physical rehabilitation benefits to individuals with SUD than MICT is unclear. The study aimed to compare the effects of HIIT versus MICT on the physical fitness of individuals with SUD.    Methods  One hundred twenty individuals with amphetamine-type stimulant dependence voluntarily participated in this study. They were randomly assigned to the HIIT group and MICT group. Both groups received training three times a week. The intervention lasted from January 2019 to December 2019. Physical fitness was assessed at the baseline, 3 months, 6 months, 9 months and 12 months, including blood pressure (BP), vital capacity(VC), hand grip, push-up, sit-and-reach, one-leg standing with eyes closed and choice reaction time. The craving level was assessed using the Visual Analog Scale at baseline, 6 months and 12 months to see any change along with the improvement in physical fitness. Two-way repeated measures ANOVA was applied to analyse the differences in change by group (HIIT and MICT) and time (baseline, 3 months, 6 months, 9 months and 12 months).    Results  The within-group factor displayed significant changes in the HIIT and MICT groups in terms of systolic BP (F  (4,336)  = 12.799,  P  < 0.001,η2 = 0.204), diastolic BP (F (4,336)  = 9.495,  P  < 0.001, η2 = 0.16), VC (F (4,336)  = 18.121,  P  < 0.001, η2 = 0.177), hand grip (F (4,336)  = 34.815,  P  < 0.001, η2 = 0.293), sit-and-reach (F (4,336)  = 13.871,  P  < 0.001, η2 = 0.142), push-up (F (4,336)  = 28.805,  P  < 0.001, η2 = 0.255), one-leg standing with eyes closed (F (4,336)  = 14.495,  P  < 0.001, η2 = 0.156) and choice reaction time (F (4,336)  = 20.603,  P  < 0.001, η2 = 0.197). The craving level decreased after 12 months of intervention in both groups (F (2,168)  = 11.25,  P  < 0.001, η2 = 0.118), but no significant differences in physical fitness and craving level were found in between groups and the interactions of group × time.    Conclusions  After 12 months of intervention, physical fitness improved while craving level decreased in the two groups. These findings suggest that both HIIT and MICT have positive effects on individuals with SUD in terms of physical fitness.    Trial registration   ChiCTR1900022158  Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: Registered 27th March, 2019.

Comparison of physical effect between two training methods for individuals with substance use disorder