PurposeHigh intensity interval training (HIIT) has been proposed as a time-efficient format of exercise to reduce the chronic disease burden associated with sedentary behaviour. Changes in oxygen utilisation at the local tissue level during an acute session of HIIT could be the primary stimulus for the health benefits associated with this format of exercise. The recovery periods of HIIT effect the physiological responses that occur during the session. It was hypothesised that in sedentary individuals, local and systemic oxygen utilisation would be higher during HIIT interspersed with active recovery periods, when compared to passive recovery periods.MethodsTwelve sedentary males (mean ± SD; age 23 ± 3 yr) completed three conditions on a cycle ergometer: 1) HIIT with passive recovery periods between four bouts (HIITPASS) 2) HIIT with active recovery periods between four bouts (HIITACT) 3) HIITACT with four HIIT bouts replaced with passive periods (REC). Deoxygenated haemoglobin (HHb) in the vastus lateralis (VL) and gastrocnemius (GN) muscles and the pre-frontal cortex (FH), oxygen consumption (VO2), power output and heart rate (HR) were measured continuously during the three conditions.ResultsThere was a significant increase in HHb at VL during bouts 2 (p = 0.017), 3 (p = 0.035) and 4 (p = 0.035) in HIITACT, compared to HIITPASS. Mean power output was significantly lower in HIITACT, compared to HIITPASS (p < 0.001). There was a significant main effect for site in both HIITPASS (p = 0.029) and HIITACT (p = 0.005). There were no significant differences in VO2 and HR between HIITPASS and HIITACT.ConclusionsThe increase in HHb at VL and the lower mean power output during HIITACT could indicate that a higher level of deoxygenation contributes to decreased mechanical power in sedentary participants. The significant differences in HHb between sites indicates the specificity of oxygen utilisation.

Background Sprint interval training (SIT) can be as effective, or more effective, than continuous moderate intensity exercise (CMIE) for improving a primary risk factor for cardiometabolic disease, low cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF). However, there has been no direct comparison in inactive individuals, of the acute effects of a session of SIT with a work-matched session of CMIE on local oxygen utilisation, which is a primary stimulus for increasing CRF. Furthermore, post-exercise blood pressure (BP) and enjoyment, if symptomatic and low, respectively, have implications for safety and adherence to exercise and have not been compared between these specific conditions. It was hypothesised that in young inactive men, local oxygen utilisation would be higher, while post-exercise BP and enjoyment would be lower for SIT, when compared to CMIE. Methods A total of 11 inactive men (mean ± SD; age 23 ± 4 years) completed a maximal ramp-incremental exercise test followed by two experiment conditions: (1) SIT and (2) work-matched CMIE on a cycle ergometer on separate days. Deoxygenated haemoglobin (∆HHb) in the pre-frontal cortex (FH), gastrocnemius (GN), left vastus lateralis (LVL) and the right vastus lateralis (RVL) muscles, systemic oxygen utilisation (VO2), systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP) blood pressure and physical activity enjoyment scale (PACES) were measured during the experiment conditions. Results During SIT, compared to CMIE, ∆HHb in FH (p = 0.016) and GN (p = 0.001) was higher, while PACES (p = 0.032) and DBP (p = 0.043) were lower. No differences in SBP and ∆HHb in LVL and RVL were found between conditions. Conclusions In young inactive men, higher levels of physiological stress occurred during SIT, which potentially contributed to lower levels of post-exercise DBP and enjoyment, when compared to CMIE.

BackgroundHigh-intensity interval training (HIIT) has been proposed as a time-efficient exercise format to improve exercise adherence, thereby targeting the chronic disease burden associated with sedentary behaviour. Exercise mode (cycling, running), if self-selected, will likely affect the physiological and enjoyment responses to HIIT in sedentary individuals. Differences in physiological and enjoyment responses, associated with the mode of exercise, could potentially influence the uptake and continued adherence to HIIT. It was hypothesised that in young sedentary men, local and systemic oxygen utilisation and enjoyment would be higher during a session of running HIIT, compared to a session of cycling HIIT.MethodsA total of 12 sedentary men (mean ± SD; age 24 ± 3 years) completed three exercise sessions: a maximal incremental exercise test on a treadmill (MAX) followed by two experiment conditions, (1) free-paced cycling HIIT on a bicycle ergometer (HIITCYC) and (2) constant-paced running HIIT on a treadmill ergometer (HIITRUN). Deoxygenated haemoglobin (HHb) in the gastrocnemius (GN), the left vastus lateralis (LVL) and the right vastus lateralis (RVL) muscles, oxygen consumption (VO2), heart rate (HR), ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) and physical activity enjoyment (PACES) were measured during HIITCYC and HIITRUN.ResultsThere was a higher HHb in the LVL (p = 0.001) and RVL (p = 0.002) sites and a higher VO2 (p = 0.017) and HR (p < 0.001) during HIITCYC, compared to HIITRUN. RPE was higher (p < 0.001) and PACES lower (p = 0.032) during HIITCYC compared to HIITRUN.DiscussionIn sedentary individuals, free-paced cycling HIIT produces higher levels of physiological stress when compared to constant-paced running HIIT. Participants perceived running HIIT to be more enjoyable than cycling HIIT. These findings have implications for selection of mode of HIIT for physical stress, exercise enjoyment and compliance.

In this study the effect of complete visual stimulus deprivation and manipulation of auditory timing signals during this deprivation on pacing strategy during an exercise bout were examined. 7 moderately trained men completed four 40-km cycling time trials under laboratory conditions in either normal light or absolute darkness, with either correct or manipulated auditory timing signals and without any other timing cues. The subjects were told to perform the time trial in the fastest time possible. There was no significant difference among trials for time to perform the trial, power output, heart rate, or ratings of perceived exertion, indicating that brain-control mechanisms responsible for pacing are not affected by manipulation of light or auditory signals.