ABSTRACT

We compared the impact of a one-year periodized exercise training versus a non-periodized exercise training on health-related physical fitness (HRPF) including body composition, cardiorespiratory and muscular fitness in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). Fifty CAD patients (60.4 ± 9.9 years) were randomized to either a periodized training group (PG) (n = 25) or a non-periodized training group (NPG) (n = 25). Both consisted of a combined training programme, performed 3 days/week for 12 months. Thirty-six CAD patients (PG: n = 18, NPG: n = 18) successfully completed the exercise regimes. In both groups, a favourable main effect for time was evident for peak VO₂, peak workload, anaerobic threshold and respiratory compensation point workloads and VO₂, whole body skeletal muscle mass and quality index at 12 months.

In conclusion, a periodized model is as effective as a non-periodized model in promoting increases in HRPF outcomes following a one-year intervention. These findings indicate that health-professionals can add variation to cardiac rehabilitation workouts without compromising effectiveness.