Effect of traditional aerobic exercises versus sprint interval training on pulmonary function tests in young sedentary males: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND Physical inactivity is now a global non-communicable disease. Current recommendations from American College of Sports Medicine, American Heart Association and UK medical officers for physical activity are difficult to implement, due to time constraints and hence, they have less compliance. PURPOSE To compare Sprint Interval Training (SIT) and traditional aerobic exercise (AE) with respect to changes in Vital capacity (VC), Maximum Voluntary Ventilation (MVV) and Physical Fitness Index (PFI) in young sedentary males. STUDY DESIGN This was a randomised, controlled trial. METHODS Fourteen young, sedentary, healthy males who were aged 18-25 years were randomly allocated to SIT group and AE group for 3 weeks. SIT group exercised at high intensity for 10 minutes a day, three days a week. AE group exercised at moderate intensity for 30 minutes a day, five days a week. RESULTS Improvement in FVC (litres) in AE group was 0.31 ± 0.11 and that in SIT group was 0.48 ± 0.17. The improvement in MVV (litres) in AE Group was 21.5 ± 11.6 and that in SIT group was 27.77 ± 7.03. Thus, SIT showed a better improvement in primary outcome i.e. FVC and MVV, although difference in improvement was statistically not significant (p= 0.09 and 0.29 respectively). Secondary outcome i.e. PFI improved by 5.57 ± 1.71% in AE group and by 10.28 ± 3.03% in SIT group. The difference in improvement was statistically significant (p= 0.003). CONCLUSIONS SIT can be suggested as a time efficient option for improving cardiorespiratory fitness and hence, it can be used as a health promotion strategy.