Key result
HRV-guided training matches or exceeds block periodization for aerobic power despite ~31% lower training load.
Why the study?
The study was conducted to clarify the effects of heart rate variability-guided aerobic training on submaximal and maximal aerobic power.
Does HRV-guided aerobic training improve submaximal and maximal aerobic power compared to block periodization training in active men?
RCT (n=12)
Open-label
No
Does HRV-guided aerobic training improve submaximal and maximal aerobic power compared to block periodization training in active men?
Effect estimate: ES -1.54
Absolute Event Rate: 1015% vs 1472%
p-value: p=<0.05
HRV-guided aerobic training enhances submaximal and maximal aerobic power with a lower overall training load compared to traditional block periodization.
HRV-guided training may support aerobic gains with lower load in active men; hypothesis-generating and leaves open confirmation in larger randomized trials.
This study aims to clarify the effects of heart rate variability (HRV)-guided aerobic training on submaximal and maximal aerobic power. Twelve active men participated in a 5-week intervention and were divided into two groups: a block periodization training group (BP, n = 6) and a HRV-guided training group (HRV-G, n = 6). All participants underwent the same aerobic training during week one. In weeks 2–5, the training load for the HRV-G was adjusted based on the HRV of an individual on waking. The BP underwent 2 weeks of overload training followed by 2 weeks of taper training. To determine the submaximal and maximal aerobic powers, an incremental load test was performed at baseline and once a week. The internal load during the training sessions was derived from the heart rate. The monotony and strain were calculated from the internal load. TRIMP and the strain were lower in the HRV-G than BP. The HRV-G had a greater relative distribution of time spent at low-intensity and a lower relative distribution of time spent at high-intensity than BP. The change in the maximal and submaximal aerobic power was greater in the HRV than in BP. The current findings indicate that combined low- and high-intensity HRV-guided training enhance increases the submaximal and maximal aerobic power, regardless lower training load than BP.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Morinaga et al. (2024) conducted an RCT in Healthy active men (n=12). Heart rate variability-guided aerobic training vs. Block periodization training was evaluated on Training impulse (TRIMP) (ES -1.54, p=<0.05). Heart rate variability-guided aerobic training enhanced submaximal and maximal aerobic power to a similar or greater extent than block periodization training, despite a significantly lower training load (TRIMP 1015 vs 1472, p<0.05).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: