Key result
High-intensity interval training and continuous training both significantly increased peak oxygen uptake in boys (p<0.05), but interval training uniquely improved peak oxygen pulse.
Why the study?
Does high-intensity interval training improve aerobic power compared to moderate-intensity continuous training in primary school boys?
RCT (n=35)
Does high-intensity interval training improve aerobic power compared to moderate-intensity continuous training in primary school boys?
p-value: p=<0.05
High-intensity interval training confers different physiological adaptations, such as increased peak oxygen pulse and ventilatory threshold, compared to continuous steady-state training in primary school boys.
Hypothesis-generating in boys; larger RCTs needed before considering HIIT adaptations in practice.
The purpose of this study was to assess whether the magnitude of change in aerobic power was different in boys (mean age 10.25 +/- 0.50 y) who followed a high-intensity interval training protocol, compared to those who followed a moderate-intensity continuous training protocol. Boys were assigned to either a control group (n = 15), a continuous training group (n = 10), or an interval training group (n = 10). They completed peak oxygen uptake tests at baseline and following an 8-week training period. The control group continued with normal activity habits, whilst the continuous training group followed a 20-minute steady-state cycle protocol at 80-85 % of the maximal heart rate, and the interval training group completed 30-s sprints on a cycle ergometer, interspersed with active rest periods. The two training protocols were designed to incur similar cardiovascular work over the 20 minutes of each training session. Significant increases (p < 0.05) in peak oxygen uptake were noted for both the interval and continuous training groups. The interval training group showed marked pre- to post-increases in both peak oxygen pulse, oxygen pulse at the ventilatory threshold, and ventilatory threshold that were not apparent in the continuous group boys. It would appear that a high-intensity interval protocol confers a different training effect in comparison to continuous steady-state training in boys. Possible mechanisms that underpin these adaptations may include increased blood volume and a concomitant adjustment in stroke volume.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
McManus et al. (2005) conducted an RCT in Healthy primary school boys (n=35). High-intensity interval training vs. Moderate-intensity continuous training and control was evaluated on Peak oxygen uptake (p=<0.05). High-intensity interval training and continuous training both significantly increased peak oxygen uptake in boys (p<0.05), but interval training uniquely improved peak oxygen pulse.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: