The performance and aerobic endurance effects of high-intensity versus moderate-intensity continuous running

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to investigate the performance and aerobic endurance effects of high-intensity (HICR) versus moderate-intensity continuous running (MICR), which were nonmatched for total work. Twenty healthy recreational athletes (aged 28 ± 5 years) were randomly assigned to an HICR, MICR, or no-intervention control (C) group. The HICR group (n = 7) performed a 20-min strenuous, almost exhausting, run above lactate threshold (LT) at ∼88% of maximal heart rate (HRmax), whereas the MICR group (n = 7) performed a 40-min run at ∼80% HRmax. Both the HICR and MICR groups performed 3 intervention sessions a week, in addition to ∼60% of their regular aerobic exercise, for 10 weeks. The C group (n = 6) performed regular physical exercise throughout the study. Time to exhaustion, during a ∼4–8-min ramp test procedure, was significantly increased by 23% and 24% (P < 0.01) following HICR or MICR, respectively, with no significant difference in the change in time to exhaustion (P = 1.00) at pre- to post-training between the 2 training modalities (HICR and MICR). In the HICR group, maximal oxygen consumption and velocity at LT increased significantly by 5.0% and 6.8% (P < 0.01), respectively. The MICR group increased relative maximal oxygen consumption (mL·kg−1·min−1) significantly by 4.7% (P < 0.05), whereas the pulmonary respiratory gas-exchange ratio was significantly decreased at a submaximal workload by 4.2% (P < 0.01), indicating enhanced fat oxidation. No performance or physiological effects were observed in the C group. The present study indicates that even with a substantially lower total energy turnover, HICR can be as performance enhancing as MICR. Moreover, HICR can increase maximal aerobic power, whereas MICR may enhance fat oxidation.

Effects of Endurance Training Intensity on Pulmonary Diffusing Capacity at Rest and after Maximal Aerobic Exercise in Young Athletes

“…Our study demonstrates that endurance training increased VO 2 max by 5% only in the IET but not in the MET group, indicating that a moderate endurance training program is sufficient to maintain VO 2 max but not to improve it. The slight increase in VO 2 max associated with the small decrease in HRmax can be attributed partly to hypervolemia induced by increases in cardiac stroke volume due to the training [ 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 ]. Another study [ 38 ] suggested that improvement in VO 2 max after endurance training was attributed to increases in cardiac output.…”

The short-term development of performance and aerobic endurance following prolonged low-intensity ski trekking in Svalbard: A case study

“…The different findings between the present study (maintained absolute VO 2max ) and the study by Sandbaek et al (1997) (decreased absolute VO 2max in two of three participants) may be due to the use of different test methods (ski treksimulated testing in the present study versus run-specific testing in the study by Sandbaek et al (1997)). Nevertheless, as intervention studies of moderately trained individuals (pre-training relative VO 2max of ~50-60 ml•kg −1 •min −1 ) indicate that exercise intensities >85% HR max are necessary to affect absolute VO 2max significantly (Helgerud et al, 2007;Jarstad & Mamen, 2019), it is not to be expected that recreational athletes with high aerobic fitness (pretraining relative VO 2max of ≥60 ml•kg −1 •min −1 ) would improve absolute VO 2max following low-intensity exercise around 60% HR max .…”