HRV-guided endurance training significantly improved submaximal physiological parameters compared to predefined training (g = 0.296; 95% CI 0.031-0.562; p=0.028), but not performance or V̇O2peak.
Meta-Analysis (n=198)
Does HRV-guided endurance training improve physiological parameters and performance compared to predefined training in exercising individuals?
HRV-guided endurance training yields better improvements in submaximal physiological parameters and fewer non-responders than predefined training, despite similar overall performance gains.
Effect estimate: Hedges' g 0.296 (95% CI 0.031 to 0.562)
p-value: p=0.028
OBJECTIVES: To systematically perform a meta-analysis of the scientific literature to determine whether the outcomes of endurance training based on heart rate variability (HRV) are more favorable than those of predefined training. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: PubMed and Web of Science were searched systematically in March of 2020 using keywords related to endurance, the ANS, and training. To compare the outcomes of HRV-guided and predefined training, Hedges' g effect size and associated 95% confidence intervals were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 8 studies (198 participants) were identified comprising 9 interventions involving a variety of approaches. Compared to predefined training, most HRV-guided interventions included fewer moderate- and/or high-intensity training sessions. Fixed effects meta-analysis revealed a significant medium-sized positive effect of HRV-guided training on submaximal physiological parameters (g = 0.296, 95% CI 0.031 to 0.562, p = 0.028), but its effects on performance (g = 0.079, 95% CI -0.050 to 0.393, p = 0.597) and V̇O2peak (g = 0.171, 95% CI -0.213 to 0.371, p = 0.130) were small and not statistically significant. Moreover, with regards to performance, HRV-guided training was associated with fewer non-responders and more positive responders. CONCLUSIONS: . There were fewer non-responders regarding performance with HRV-based training.
Düking et al. (Tue,) conducted a meta-analysis in Endurance training (n=198). HRV-guided endurance training vs. Predefined training was evaluated on Submaximal physiological parameters (Hedges' g 0.296, 95% CI 0.031 to 0.562, p=0.028). HRV-guided endurance training significantly improved submaximal physiological parameters compared to predefined training (g = 0.296; 95% CI 0.031-0.562; p=0.028), but not performance or V̇O2peak.