Key result
Intensity domain-based exercise training reduces the V̇O2 kinetics time constant by ~31% regardless of intensity.
Why the study?
The study was conducted to examine the effect of 3 and 6 weeks of intensity domain-based exercise training on VO2 kinetics changes and their relationship with performance indices.
Does intensity domain-based exercise training differentially improve V̇O2 kinetics and correlate with indices of exercise performance in young healthy participants?
RCT (n=84)
Open-label
Stratified randomization based on sex
No
Does intensity domain-based exercise training differentially improve V̇O2 kinetics and correlate with indices of exercise performance in young healthy participants?
Exercise training rapidly speeds V̇O2 kinetics regardless of the intensity domain, and this adaptation is not correlated with improvements in maximal exercise performance indices.
Supports any-intensity training to accelerate VO2 kinetics in healthy young adults; extends prior findings by showing no correlation with maximal performance.
Purpose This study examined the effect of 3 and 6 weeks of intensity domain-based exercise training on V̇O_2 V ˙ O 2 kinetics changes and their relationship with indices of performance. Methods Eighty-four young healthy participants (42 M, 42 F) were randomly assigned to six groups (14 participants each, age and sex-matched) consisting of: continuous cycling in the (1) moderate (MOD)-, (2) lower heavy (HVY1)-, and (3) upper heavy-intensity (HVY2)- domain; interval cycling in the (4) severe-intensity domain (i.e., high-intensity interval training (HIIT), or (5) extreme-intensity domain (i.e., sprint-interval training (SIT)); or (6) control (CON). Training participants completed two three-week phases of three supervised sessions per week, with physiological evaluations performed at PRE, MID and POST intervention. All training protocols, except SIT, were work-matched. Results There was a significant time effect for the time constant ( τ V̇O_2 τ V ˙ O 2 ) between PRE (31.6 ± 10.4 s) and MID (22.6 ± 6.9 s) (p < 0.05) and PRE and POST (21.8 ± 6.3 s) (p < 0.05), but no difference between MID and POST (p > 0.05) and no group or interaction effects (p > 0.05). There were no PRE to POST differences for CON (p < 0.05) in any variables. Despite significant increases in maximal V̇O_2 V ˙ O 2 ( V̇O_2max V ˙ O 2max ), estimated lactate threshold (θ LT ), maximal metabolic steady state (MMSS), and peak power output (PPO) for the intervention groups (p < 0.05), there were no significant correlations from PRE to MID or MID to POST between Δ τ V̇O_2 Δ τ V ˙ O 2 and Δ V̇O_2max Δ V ˙ O 2max (r = – 0.221, r = 0.119), ΔPPO (r = – 0.112, r = – 0.017), Δθ LT (r = 0.083, r = 0.142) and ΔMMSS (r = – 0.213, r = 0.049)(p > 0.05). Conclusion This study demonstrated that (i) the rapid speeding of V̇O_2 V ˙ O 2 kinetics was not intensity-dependent; and (ii) changes in indices of performance were not significantly correlated with Δ τ V̇O_2 Δ τ V ˙ O 2 .
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Inglis et al. (2024) conducted an RCT in Healthy (n=84). Intensity domain-based exercise training vs. Control was evaluated on Time constant of V̇O2 kinetics (τV̇O2) at 6 weeks (p=<0.001). Intensity domain-based exercise training significantly reduced the time constant of V̇O2 kinetics from 31.6 s to 21.8 s, with no differences between training intensities.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: