High-Intensity Functional Training (HIFT) is a novel exercise intervention that may test body systems in a balanced and integrated fashion by challenging individuals’ abilities to complete mechanical work. However, research has not previously determined if physical work capacity is unique to traditional physiologic measures of fitness. Twenty-five healthy men and women completed a six-week HIFT intervention with physical work capacity and various physiologic measures of fitness assessed pre- and post-intervention. At baseline, these physiologic measures of fitness (e.g., aerobic capacity) were significantly associated with physical work capacity and this relationship was even stronger at post-intervention assessment. Further, there were significant improvements across these physiologic measures in response to the delivered intervention. However, the change in these physiologic measures failed to predict the change in physical work capacity induced via HIFT. These findings point to the potential utility of HIFT as a unique challenge to individuals’ physiology beyond traditional resistance or aerobic training. Elucidating the translational impact of increasing work capacity via HIFT may be of great interest to health and fitness practitioners ranging from strength/conditioning coaches to physical therapists.

The session rate of perceived exertion method (sRPE) has often been utilized in sports activities in which quantification of external training loads is challenging. The multi-modal, constantly varied nature of high intensity functional training (HIFT) represents a significant hurdle to calculate external work and the sRPE method may provide an elegant solution to this problem. However, no studies have investigated the psychometric properties of sRPE within HIFT interventions. Twenty-five healthy men and women participated in six weeks of HIFT. Rate of perceived exertion and heart rate were assessed within every training session throughout the duration of the intervention. Compared to criterion heart rate-based measures, we observed sRPE method is a valid tool across individual, group, and sex levels. However, poor reliability in participants’ abilities to correctly match rate of perceived exertion with the relative level of physiologic effort (i.e., percentile of maximum heart rate) currently limits the utility of this strategy within HIFT. When applied, the validity and reliability of the sRPE seem to improve over time, and future research should continue to explore the potential of this monitoring strategy within HIFT interventions.

Heart rate variability (HRV) may be useful for prescribing high-intensity functional training (HIFT) exercise programs. This study aimed to compare effects of HRV-guided and predetermined HIFT on cardiovascular function, body composition, and performance. Methods: Recreationally-active adults (n = 55) were randomly assigned to predetermined HIFT (n = 29, age = 24.1 ± 4.1 years) or HRV-guided HIFT (n = 26, age = 23.7 ± 4.5) groups. Both groups completed 11 weeks of daily HRV recordings, 6 weeks of HIFT (5 d·week-1), and pre- and post-test body composition and fitness assessments. Meaningful changes in resting HRV were used to modulate (i.e., reduce) HRV-guided participants’ exercise intensity. Linear mixed models were used with Bonferroni post hoc adjustment for analysis. Results: All participants significantly improved resting heart rate, lean mass, fat mass, strength, and work capacity. However, no significant between-groups differences were observed for cardiovascular function, body composition, or fitness changes. The HRV-guided group spent significantly fewer training days at high intensity (mean difference = −13.56 ± 0.83 days; p < 0.001). Conclusion: HRV-guided HIFT produced similar improvements in cardiovascular function, body composition, and fitness as predetermined HIFT, despite fewer days at high intensity. HRV shows promise for prescribing individualized exercise intensity during HIFT.

Increasing obesity rates among USA military members vary by age, pay grade, and measurement methods and threaten force fitness and readiness. Limited research has directly measured obesity among officers; those enrolled in graduate school at the Command and General Staff College (CGSC) face additional demands and increased obesity risk. This study compared obesity measurements and performance on the Army Physical Fitness test and self-rated health for a sample of mostly CGSC officers. Participants (n = 136, 75.7% male, 79.6% officers) completed body composition measures; BMI, body fat percentage (BF%), waist circumference (WC), and waist-to-height ratio (WHtR) estimated obesity rates and were compared for discordance. Army Physical Fitness Test pass/fail rates and self-reported perceived health were compared with each obesity classification. Obesity prevalence was 18.5–39.7%, differing by sex and measure. BMI, WC, and WHtR underestimated obesity compared to BF% at least 21% of the time. WHtR had the lowest discordance with BF%. Soldiers categorized as obese were significantly more likely to fail the fitness test and report lower self-rated health than non-obese soldiers. Overall, obesity rates among our primarily officer sample were higher than previous studies, particularly for women. Interventions to address obesity are necessary among military officers to optimize human performance.

No abstract