Physiological, perceptual and neuromuscular responses of team sport athletes to short duration high intensity interval training using cycling.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q2 PHYSIOLOGY
Craig Twist, Elliot Conboy, Max Davidson, Shane Price, Jamie Highton
{"title":"Physiological, perceptual and neuromuscular responses of team sport athletes to short duration high intensity interval training using cycling.","authors":"Craig Twist, Elliot Conboy, Max Davidson, Shane Price, Jamie Highton","doi":"10.1007/s00421-025-05803-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To examine the acute physiological, perceptual and neuromuscular responses of team sport athletes to two volume-matched cycling high intensity interval training (HIIT) sessions with short work bouts (< 60 s).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using and randomised crossover design, 16 male team sport players completed 2 × 6 min (with 5 min between sets) repeated efforts of 15 s or 30 s exercising at 120% power at <math><mover><mtext>V</mtext> <mo>˙</mo></mover> </math> O<sub>2 max</sub> (p <math><mover><mtext>V</mtext> <mo>˙</mo></mover> </math> O<sub>2 max</sub>) followed by matched-duration passive recovery on a cycle ergometer.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Absolute mean <math><mover><mtext>V</mtext> <mo>˙</mo></mover> </math> O<sub>2</sub> (p = 0.0257) and relative mean <math><mover><mtext>V</mtext> <mo>˙</mo></mover> </math> O<sub>2</sub> (p = 0.0275) were higher in 15 s than 30 s HIIT. Total time at > 90% <math><mover><mtext>V</mtext> <mo>˙</mo></mover> </math> O<sub>2 max</sub> during the HIIT was higher for 15 s compared to 30 s HIIT (p = 0.0257). Heart rate remained the same between trials (p = 0.805) as did oxygen pulse (p = 0.1161). B[La] was lower in 15 s compared to 30 s HIIT (p = 0.0257). Differences in dRPE-L (p = 0.0495), dRPE-B (p = 0.0495) and dRPE-O (p = 0.1837) suggested lower perceived exertion in 15 s compared to 30 s HIIT. Maximal isometric knee extension force revealed a greater reduction after 30 s HIIT (p = 0.0495).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Team sport athletes using short duration cycling-based HIIT should use 15 s work intervals to elicit greater time working near <math><mover><mtext>V</mtext> <mo>˙</mo></mover> </math> O<sub>2 max</sub> at a lower perceived exertion and with smaller reductions in peak muscle force after exercise.</p>","PeriodicalId":12005,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Applied Physiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Applied Physiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-025-05803-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To examine the acute physiological, perceptual and neuromuscular responses of team sport athletes to two volume-matched cycling high intensity interval training (HIIT) sessions with short work bouts (< 60 s).

Methods: Using and randomised crossover design, 16 male team sport players completed 2 × 6 min (with 5 min between sets) repeated efforts of 15 s or 30 s exercising at 120% power at V ˙ O2 max (p V ˙ O2 max) followed by matched-duration passive recovery on a cycle ergometer.

Results: Absolute mean V ˙ O2 (p = 0.0257) and relative mean V ˙ O2 (p = 0.0275) were higher in 15 s than 30 s HIIT. Total time at > 90% V ˙ O2 max during the HIIT was higher for 15 s compared to 30 s HIIT (p = 0.0257). Heart rate remained the same between trials (p = 0.805) as did oxygen pulse (p = 0.1161). B[La] was lower in 15 s compared to 30 s HIIT (p = 0.0257). Differences in dRPE-L (p = 0.0495), dRPE-B (p = 0.0495) and dRPE-O (p = 0.1837) suggested lower perceived exertion in 15 s compared to 30 s HIIT. Maximal isometric knee extension force revealed a greater reduction after 30 s HIIT (p = 0.0495).

Conclusion: Team sport athletes using short duration cycling-based HIIT should use 15 s work intervals to elicit greater time working near V ˙ O2 max at a lower perceived exertion and with smaller reductions in peak muscle force after exercise.

团体运动运动员对短时间高强度间歇训练的生理、知觉和神经肌肉反应。
目的:检查急性生理、认知和神经肌肉反应团队运动的运动员两volume-matched自行车高强度间歇训练(这种训练)课程较短的工作发作(方法:使用和随机交叉设计,16岁男性团队运动球员完成2×6分钟和5分钟(集)之间重复15或30年代的努力锻炼120%力量V˙O2马克斯˙O2 (p V max)其次是matched-duration被动恢复周期测力计。结果:15 s的绝对平均V˙O2 (p = 0.0257)和相对平均V˙O2 (p = 0.0275)高于30 s。HIIT期间> 90% V˙O2 max的总时间为15 s,高于HIIT期间的30 s (p = 0.0257)。试验之间心率保持不变(p = 0.805),氧脉冲保持不变(p = 0.1161)。HIIT 15 s时B[La]较30 s时降低(p = 0.0257)。dRPE-L (p = 0.0495)、dRPE-B (p = 0.0495)和dRPE-O (p = 0.1837)的差异表明,与30 s HIIT相比,15 s HIIT的感觉运动更低。最大等距膝关节伸长力在30秒HIIT后下降幅度更大(p = 0.0495)。结论:团队运动运动员使用短时间的基于自行车的HIIT应该使用15 s的工作间隔,以在较低的感知消耗和较小的运动后肌肉力量峰值减少的情况下,获得更多的接近V˙O2 max的工作时间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
6.70%
发文量
227
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Applied Physiology (EJAP) aims to promote mechanistic advances in human integrative and translational physiology. Physiology is viewed broadly, having overlapping context with related disciplines such as biomechanics, biochemistry, endocrinology, ergonomics, immunology, motor control, and nutrition. EJAP welcomes studies dealing with physical exercise, training and performance. Studies addressing physiological mechanisms are preferred over descriptive studies. Papers dealing with animal models or pathophysiological conditions are not excluded from consideration, but must be clearly relevant to human physiology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信