Key result
HIIT increases VO2max by ~13% compared to SIT, while HIIT+SIT boosts exercise efficiency.
Why the study?
Exercise prescription relies on expert consensus and lacks dose-regulation mechanisms, prompting investigation into the dose-response relationship between tennis participation and cardiorespiratory fitness in college students.
Does high-intensity or sprint interval tennis training improve cardiorespiratory fitness compared to moderate-intensity continuous training in healthy college students?
Does high-intensity or sprint interval tennis training improve cardiorespiratory fitness compared to moderate-intensity continuous training in healthy college students?
Different intensities of tennis training yield specific cardiorespiratory adaptations, with HIIT primarily improving VO2max and SIT enhancing anaerobic power, potentially mediated by the AMPK-PGC-1α pathway.
Supports HIIT over SIT for VO2max gains in active young adults; extends intensity-specific tennis training data.
Based on the FITT-VP principle, this study investigated the dose-response relationship between tennis participation and cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) in college students. Addressing the current reliance on expert consensus for exercise prescription and the lack of dose-regulation mechanisms, this study focused on high-intensity interval training (HIIT) and sprint interval training (SIT). It aimed to analyze the dynamic relationship and biological mechanisms between exercise intensity (SIT: 80-100% HRmax vs. HIIT: 75-90% HRmax), duration (8 weeks, frequency 2-3 sessions/week), and key CRF indicators (VO2max, anaerobic threshold, and exercise efficiency). Forty healthy college students with similar tennis experience were randomly assigned to HIIT (n=10), SIT (n=10), HIIT+SIT (n=10), or moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT, 60-70% HRmax, n=10) groups for an 8-week intervention. Pre- and post-intervention measurements included body composition, cardiopulmonary parameters (VO2max, anaerobic threshold, exercise efficiency), and physiological indicators (heart rate recovery, blood lactate concentration). Statistical analyses employed two-way repeated-measures ANOVA for group differences and mixed-effects models to quantify the relationship between CRF improvement and dose parameters. Multidimensional data integration was performed using PCA-PLS-DA. Post-exercise plasma PGC-1α levels were measured via ELISA, and mitochondrial oxidative capacity was assessed using near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) of the vastus lateralis. 1) HIIT significantly improved VO2max (12.9%, p < 0.05) compared to SIT (7.6%), with increases positively correlated with PGC-1α elevation (r=0.67, p < 0.01). SIT showed greater improvement in peak anaerobic power (Δ15.3%) than HIIT (9.7%). 2) The HIIT+SIT group exhibited synergistic effects, with exercise efficiency increasing by 11.7% (ΔECR) and heart rate recovery improving by 8.8s (ΔHRR). 3) Dose-response modeling revealed a linear trend for HIIT (R ² =0.72) and an intensity threshold effect for SIT (≥90% HRmax). The dose-response effects of tennis on CRF may be mediated by the AMPK-PGC-1α pathway. The study proposes a “stepwise” training regimen based on the interaction of “intensity-volume” for different training goals (aerobic capacity/anaerobic endurance), providing new insights for personalized exercise prescription design.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xianyue Li (2026) studied this question. HIIT significantly improved VO2max by 12.9% compared to SIT's 7.6%, with the HIIT+SIT group increasing exercise efficiency by 11.7%.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: