Key result
Resistive aquatic high-intensity interval training provided comparable acute metabolic benefits to standard aquatic high-intensity interval training, with no significant difference in post-exercise resting energy expenditure.
Why the study?
The effects of aquatic high-intensity interval training and resistive aquatic high-intensity interval training on improving metabolic responses were not known.
Does resistive AHIIT improve resting energy expenditure and respiratory exchange ratio compared to standard AHIIT in healthy young adults?
RCT (n=20)
Open-label
Randomized
No
Does resistive AHIIT improve resting energy expenditure and respiratory exchange ratio compared to standard AHIIT in healthy young adults?
Absolute Event Rate: 10.88% vs 11.3%
p-value: p=0.76
Resistive aquatic high-intensity interval training provides comparable acute metabolic benefits to standard aquatic HIIT in healthy young adults.
Single-session data in healthy adults leaves open whether resistive AHIIT alters metabolic responses; larger trials needed before practice implications.
Background The effects of Aquatic High-Intensity Interval Training (AHIIT) and resistive AHIIT (Resistive AHIIT) to improve metabolic responses were not yet known. Objective This study was to compare the metabolic responses and perceived effort in young healthy adults in a single session of AHIIT and resistive AHIIT. Methods 20 healthy subjects (9 females, 11 males) performed a stationary running at a matched exercise intensity prior AHIIT and resistive AHIIT [10 × 1-min bouts of stationary running at 90% maximum heart rate (HR max) separated by 1-min active recovery] to examine the metabolic and cardiometabolic outcomes. Mixed effects models were applied to analyze the effects of group, time, and the interaction between group and time on both outcomes. The level of correlations between metabolic variables was checked by Pearson's linear correlation. Results There are significant differences on pre and post resting energy expenditure (REE) within both AHIIT and resistive AHIIT groups ( p < 0.01) respectively as well as the subjective rate of perceived exertion (RPE) ( p < 0.01) within RAHIIT group. A moderate correlation found on respiratory exertional ratio (RER) and RPE in resistive AHIIT (r = 0.534). No significant differences between groups in terms of HR max, mean heart rate (HR mean), peak oxygen consumption (VO 2 peak) and total energy expenditure (TEE) ( p = 0.50, p = 0.48, p = 0.81, p = 0.59). Conclusion Resistive AHIIT provides comparable benefits of metabolic outcomes with AHIIT. Comparable results allowed AHIIT and resistive AHIIT prescriptions precisely.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kwok et al. (2024) conducted an RCT in Healthy adults (n=20). Resistive Aquatic High-Intensity Interval Training (Resistive AHIIT) vs. Aquatic High-Intensity Interval Training (AHIIT) was evaluated on Resting energy expenditure (REE) post-intervention (Kcal/min) (p=0.76). Resistive aquatic high-intensity interval training provided comparable acute metabolic benefits to standard aquatic high-intensity interval training, with no significant difference in post-exercise resting energy expenditure.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: