Author(s): STERN, G., PSYCHARAKIS, S., PHILLIPS, S., Institution: UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH, Country: UNITED KINGDOM, Abstract-ID: 307

INTRODUCTION:
Background: An important training goal for older adults (OA) is improving and retaining Functional Movement (FM), defined as fundamental movement patterns that require a balance of mobility and stability (including neuromuscular/motor control) used in the performance of basic locomotor, manipulative, and stabilizing movements [1]. While FM has been positively associated with physical activity and increases in muscular power, it is not clear whether high intensity interval training (HIIT) or moderate intensity continuous training (MICT) is more effective for preserving and promoting FM.
Objective: To determine the differences in adaptation to HIIT and MICT on FM, the relationship between FM and neuromuscular mechanical power development, the relative efficiency of HIIT vs MICT, and the association between FM and health related quality of life (HRQoL) in adults aged 50-70 years.

METHODS:
A mixed sex sample of 31 healthy, physically active participants was recruited for the free-living intervention study. Testing included FM screening (FMS), a graded exercise test (GXT) to 90% of maximum heart rate, and counter movement jump (CMJ) trials recorded with integrated kinematic and kinetic data. The participants were randomized by FMS score into HIIT and MICT intervention groups. Training protocols were executed 3 x week-1 for six weeks with exercise session location, duration, intensity and adherence collected from GPS enabled heart rate monitors. Exercise volume and estimates of energy expenditure were calculated from HR data directly.
RESULTS:
Both HIIT and MICT groups increased FM scores by 9.3 ± 12.3% and 10.5 ± 12.9% respectively. The effect size of HIIT vs MICT on FM was trivial and insignificant (d = 0.09 95% CI [-0.69, 0.88] p = 0.82).
The CMJ outcome measures were net vertical impulse (NVI), maximum knee angle (MKA), knee joint angular velocity (JAV), pelvic vertical displacement (PVD), pelvic vertical velocity (PVV), and jump height performance. Within-group measures that reached statistical significance/near significance were PVD: HIIT d = 0.31, 95% CI [-0.01, 0.66] p = 0.06; MICT d = 0.32, 95% CI [0.08, 0.58] p = 0.01 and Jump Performance: HIIT d= 0.21, 95% CI [0.08, 0.37] p = 0.003; MICT d = 0.25, 95% CI [0.06, 0.47] p = 0.01. All other within and between group measures were trivial to small and did not achieve statistical significance.
Training effects of HIIT and MICT on the physical summary and mental summary of the HRQoL scores was trivial to small and did not reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSION:
Both HIIT and MICT can improve FM and produce small but statistically significant change in neuromuscular mechanical power generation. HIIT can produce equivalent adaptations to MICT in 28.5% less time, 24.7% lower energy expenditure, and 21.2% lower exercise volume.

References:
1. Cook G, Burton L, Hoogenboom BJ, Voight M. Functional movement screening: the use of fundamental movements as an assessment of function. Int J Sport Phys Ther. 2014.