ARTICLE | doi:10.20944/preprints201803.0080.v1
Subject: Biology, Physiology Keywords: high-intensity functional training; work capacity; performance
Online: 12 March 2018 (05:33:23 CET)
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.
ARTICLE | doi:10.20944/preprints202105.0733.v1
Subject: Biology, Anatomy & Morphology Keywords: conditioning; high-intensity functional training; methods; performance; physical fitness
Online: 31 May 2021 (10:36:00 CEST)
The purpose of the present study was to compare heart rate (HR), blood lactate and training load between different CrossFit® workouts, with equalized total volume in men and women. The study included 23 individuals (13 men and 10 women) experienced in CrossFit® training, who performed two workouts with different training types (as many reps as possible - AMRAP and for time) but equalized volume. Measurements of lactate, HR and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) were performed. The results showed that there was no HR interaction between workout time and sex (p = 0.822; η2 = 0.006] and between workout type and sex (p = 0.064, η2 = 0.803). HR significantly differed during each workout type (p <0.001, η2 = 0.621), but not between the two workout types (p = 0.552, η2 = 0.017). Lactate showed no difference between the workout types (p = 0.474, η2 = 0.768), although the training load was higher (p = 0.033, η2 = 0.199) in women when they performed AMRAP. Altogether, HR was not significantly different between training types or sex, while RPE, lactate and training load showed small differences depending on the group (women or men) or workout type (AMRAP or 'for time').