Jonathan P Little1, Jodi Langley2, Michael Lee2, Etienne Myette-Côté2, Garett Jackson2, Cody Durrer2, Martin J Gibala3, Mary E Jung2. 1. School of Health and Exercise Sciences, University of British Columbia, Okanagan Campus, 1147 Research Road, Kelowna, BC, V1V 1V7, Canada. jonathan.little@ubc.ca. 2. School of Health and Exercise Sciences, University of British Columbia, Okanagan Campus, 1147 Research Road, Kelowna, BC, V1V 1V7, Canada. 3. Department of Kinesiology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Abstract
PURPOSE:Sprint interval training (SIT), involving brief intermittent bursts of vigorous exercise within a single training session, is a time-efficient way to improve cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF). It is unclear whether performing sprints spread throughout the day with much longer (≥ 1 h) recovery periods can similarly improve CRF, potentially allowing individuals to perform "sprint snacks" throughout the day to gain health benefits. METHODS:Healthy, young, inactive adults (~ 22 years, peak oxygen uptake [VO2peak] ~ 35 ml kg- 1 min- 1) were randomly assigned to one of two groups and performed 18 training sessions over 6 wks. Sprint snacks (SS) involved 3 × 20-s 'all out' cycling bouts separated by 1-4-h rest (n = 12, 7 females). Traditional SIT involved 3 × 20-s bouts interspersed with 3-min rest within a 10-min training session (n = 16, 7 females). The primary outcome was CRF determined by a VO2peak test conducted before and after training. Secondary outcomes included a 150 kJ cycling time trial and exercise enjoyment. RESULTS:Absolute VO2peak increased by ~ 6% after SIT and ~ 4% for SS (main effect of time P = 0.002) with no difference between groups (group × time interaction, P = 0.52). 150 kJ time trial performance improved by ~ 13% in SIT and ~ 9% in SS (main effect of time, P < 0.001) with no difference between groups (group × time interaction, P = 0.36). CONCLUSION:CRF was similarly increased by a protocol involving sprint snacks spread throughout the day and a traditional SIT protocol in which bouts were separated by short recovery periods within a single training session.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: Sprint interval training (SIT), involving brief intermittent bursts of vigorous exercise within a single training session, is a time-efficient way to improve cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF). It is unclear whether performing sprints spread throughout the day with much longer (≥ 1 h) recovery periods can similarly improve CRF, potentially allowing individuals to perform "sprint snacks" throughout the day to gain health benefits. METHODS: Healthy, young, inactive adults (~ 22 years, peak oxygen uptake [VO2peak] ~ 35 ml kg- 1 min- 1) were randomly assigned to one of two groups and performed 18 training sessions over 6 wks. Sprint snacks (SS) involved 3 × 20-s 'all out' cycling bouts separated by 1-4-h rest (n = 12, 7 females). Traditional SIT involved 3 × 20-s bouts interspersed with 3-min rest within a 10-min training session (n = 16, 7 females). The primary outcome was CRF determined by a VO2peak test conducted before and after training. Secondary outcomes included a 150 kJ cycling time trial and exercise enjoyment. RESULTS: Absolute VO2peak increased by ~ 6% after SIT and ~ 4% for SS (main effect of time P = 0.002) with no difference between groups (group × time interaction, P = 0.52). 150 kJ time trial performance improved by ~ 13% in SIT and ~ 9% in SS (main effect of time, P < 0.001) with no difference between groups (group × time interaction, P = 0.36). CONCLUSION: CRF was similarly increased by a protocol involving sprint snacks spread throughout the day and a traditional SIT protocol in which bouts were separated by short recovery periods within a single training session.
Authors: Monique E Francois; James C Baldi; Patrick J Manning; Samuel J E Lucas; John A Hawley; Michael J A Williams; James D Cotter Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2014-05-10 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Martin J Gibala; Jonathan P Little; Martin van Essen; Geoffrey P Wilkin; Kirsten A Burgomaster; Adeel Safdar; Sandeep Raha; Mark A Tarnopolsky Journal: J Physiol Date: 2006-07-06 Impact factor: 5.182
Authors: Kirsten A Burgomaster; Scott C Hughes; George J F Heigenhauser; Suzanne N Bradwell; Martin J Gibala Journal: J Appl Physiol (1985) Date: 2005-02-10
Authors: Jonathan Myers; Manish Prakash; Victor Froelicher; Dat Do; Sara Partington; J Edwin Atwood Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-03-14 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Andrew J R Cochran; Michael E Percival; Steven Tricarico; Jonathan P Little; Naomi Cermak; Jenna B Gillen; Mark A Tarnopolsky; Martin J Gibala Journal: Exp Physiol Date: 2014-02-14 Impact factor: 2.969
Authors: Patricia C García-Suárez; Jorge A Aburto-Corona; Iván Rentería; Luis M Gómez-Miranda; José Moncada-Jiménez; Fábio Santos Lira; Barbara Moura Antunes; Alberto Jiménez-Maldonado Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-06-16 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Birgit Wallmann-Sperlich; Peter Düking; Miriam Müller; Ingo Froböse; Billy Sperlich Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2022-04-01 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Emmanuel Stamatakis; Bo-Huei Huang; Carol Maher; Cecilie Thøgersen-Ntoumani; Afroditi Stathi; Paddy C Dempsey; Nathan Johnson; Andreas Holtermann; Josephine Y Chau; Catherine Sherrington; Amanda J Daley; Mark Hamer; Marie H Murphy; Catrine Tudor-Locke; Martin J Gibala Journal: Sports Med Date: 2021-01 Impact factor: 11.136