Interval Aerobic Training and Continious Training

The participants are diagnosed coronary artery disease aged between 40- 80 and have no mental and physical disability to take part in research. The participants' demographic infos and clinical story were recorded. To evaluate exercise capacity we used the symptom-limited exercise test (ETT) and six minute walking test (6DYT). We evaluate the life quality by using Short Form-36 (SF-36).

All those evaluation tests are done before and after training. Participants are randomly divided into two groups, the first group took part in interval aerobic training (AAE) while the other group was joining in continuous training (SAE) three times a week during 6 weeks. In both groups, significant changes were found in ETT, test time and 6 DYT scores after the rehabilitation program (p<0,05). But only AAE group have important statistical values comparing to SAE group on test time and 6DYT scores. After training SAE group showed significant statistical change in every SF-36 parameter, while AAE group showing significant values except energy/fatigue. AAE group have statistically significant changes comparing to SAE group on that parameters; physical function, role limitations due to physical function, role limitations due to emotional function and general health (p<0,05). Consequently AAE is much more tolerable comparing to SAE and AAE is considered more effective in increasing some parameters. On the other hand, we observed that both training types can be used in cardiac rehabilitation safely.

Inclusion criteria

• diagnosed coronary artery disease
• aged between 40-80
• over %55 ejection fraction

Exclusion criteria

• mental and physical disability
• unstable angina pectoris
• thrombophlebitis