Effect of continuous aerobic vs. interval training on selected anthropometrical, physiological and functional parameters of adults with Down syndrome.
High-intensity interval training beats steady cardio for weight loss and heart fitness in adults with Down syndrome.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Researchers split adults with Down syndrome into two groups. One group walked or cycled at a steady pace. The other group did short bursts of fast walking or cycling followed by rest. Both groups trained three times a week for sixteen weeks. Staff tracked weight, waist size, and how much oxygen each person could use.
What they found
Both groups got fitter, but the interval group lost more weight and gained more oxygen capacity. The steady-cardio group still improved, just not as much. No injuries were reported, so the harder bursts were safe for these adults.
How this fits with other research
Costa et al. (2017) looked at nineteen exercise studies in Down syndrome and agreed that any planned movement helps daily life. Their review includes trials like this one, so the new results strengthen their conclusion.
Aguirre Mtanous et al. (2026) later tested the same aerobic idea in adults who also had heart defects. They saw smaller gains, but proved the training is safe even with heart problems. The 2016 trial extends that safety signal to healthier adults.
Suarez-Villadat et al. (2020) ran a thirty-six-week swim program for teens and also trimmed body size. Their longer program worked, but H et al. show you can get similar fat loss in half the time by using intervals instead of steady laps.
Why it matters
If you support adults with Down syndrome, swap one steady-cardio session for interval work. Try thirty seconds fast walk, ninety seconds slow walk, repeated ten times. The person gets better results without staying longer at the gym. Check with their doctor first, then track waist size and how far they can walk in six minutes. Small switches can double their progress.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Replace one steady treadmill walk with ten cycles of thirty-seconds-fast, ninety-seconds-slow walking.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
BACKGROUND: A large percentage of adults with Down syndrome (DS) are overweight and have extremely low aerobic capacities compared with the general population and persons with intellectual disability without DS. Previous aerobic training intervention studies showed limited potential to significantly ameliorate anthropometrical and cardiovascular variables. The primary purpose of this study was to determine the effect of continuous aerobic training (CAT) vs. interval training (IT) on selected anthropometrical, health, physical and functional parameters of adults with DS. METHODS: Forty-two adults with DS (25 men and 17 women) and a mean age of 33.8 (±8.6) years were randomly allocated to one of three groups (IT, CAT and control). Training was performed for 12 weeks. The IT group performed 10-30 s all out sprints with 90 s (1:3 work-rest ratio) of low cadence, low intensity cycling or walking. The CAT group performed continuous cycling and walking at an intensity of 70-80% of VO2 peak. Heart rate monitors were used for monitoring training intensities. After 6 weeks of training, the intensity of the CAT was increased to 85% of VO2 peak, whilst the intensity of the IT group remained 'all out'. An increase of 5 min in duration was implemented after 6 weeks for both training groups. To evaluate pre-post differences between groups, a repeated analysis of covariance with post hoc Bonferroni test was performed RESULTS: After 12 weeks of training, body weight and body mass index decreased significantly more in the IT group compared with control and CAT (P < 0.05). Participants in the IT group decreased their body weight from 71.4 ± 8 to 69.4 ± 8 kg and their body mass index from 29.3 ± 4 to 28.5 ± 4 kg/m2 . Significant ameliorations for functional parameters and leg strength were shown for CAT compared with control (P < 0.05). Participants in the CAT group improved their performance in the 6 minute walk distance (499 ± 78 to 563 ± 75 m), 8-ft up-and-go (5.9 ± 1.2 to 4.8 ± 0.9) and leg strength (13.1 ± 2 to 15.2 ± 2). VO2 peak and time to exhaustion significantly improved in both the IT and CAT group compared with control (P < 0.01). Moreover, a significant improvement for relative VO2 peak was also determined for IT compared with CAT (P < 0.05). Participants in the IT group increased their VO2 peak from 32 ± 8 to 37 ± 8 mL/min/kg. Submaximal heart rate and VO2 values improved significantly within both exercise groups (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Interval training and CAT can both be pursued by adults with DS to positively impact on various parameters of anthropometry, fitness and functional ability, with IT more appropriate for improving body weight and aerobic capacity.
Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR, 2016 · doi:10.1111/jir.12251