Acute Effects of High-intensity Interval Aerobic and Functional Training at Different Intensities

Overview

Moderate-intensity physical exercise is widely recognized for its health benefits, yet time constraints limit adherence. High-intensity interval training (HIIT) has gained popularity as a more time-efficient alternative, eliciting significant cardiovascular, respiratory, metabolic, and neuromuscular responses. More recently, functional strength exercises have been integrated into high-intensity training, leading to high-intensity functional training (HIFT) and moderate-intensity functional training (MIFT). However, the acute physiological responses to these modalities remain underexplored compared to traditional HIIT (running or cycling) and strength training. This study aims to assess and compare the acute cardiovascular, metabolic, and neuromuscular responses of HIFT, MIFT, HIIT, and traditional strength training in healthy, physically active adults to inform their potential application in special populations.

Moderate-intensity physical exercise has long been a cornerstone in promoting health and well-being. However, despite its well-documented benefits, an exclusive focus on this training modality may overlook some important limitations. One such limitation is the challenge of dedicating sufficient time to physical activity to achieve health and fitness goals. Given this constraint, recent years have witnessed a significant shift in training modalities, moving away from continuous moderate-intensity exercise approaches \[e.g., 55-70% of peak heart rate (HRpeak) or 40-60% of maximal oxygen uptake (VO₂max)\] toward higher-intensity interval training protocols (e.g., \>90% HRpeak or \>85% VO₂max), thereby enhancing time efficiency and enjoyment for practitioners. In this context, the most common type of training is high-intensity interval training (HIIT). HIIT consists of performing brief, high-intensity cyclic and continuous efforts (e.g., running or cycling) separated by predefined rest periods while using a single exercise modality. These short efforts (e.g., 1 to 4 minutes) at high intensity, whether cycling or running, elicit substantial cardiovascular, respiratory, metabolic, and neuromuscular stimuli, which can persist for hours after the workout. Recently, this training approach has incorporated functional strength exercises-movements that mimic natural movement patterns and have practical applications in daily life-performed at high intensity \[e.g., \>75% of one-repetition maximum (1RM)\] and following a circuit-based exercise organization (i.e., performing one exercise after another rather than using simple sets and pauses), a modality commonly referred to as high-intensity functional training (HIFT). Reducing the intensity of prescribed functional exercises (e.g., 60% 1RM) brings the training program closer to the demands of daily activities, a modality commonly known as moderate-intensity functional training (MIFT). However, both HIFT and MIFT define their intensity theoretically, based on the relative intensity concerning the maximum dynamic concentric strength that individuals can develop in each exercise (%1RM). Meanwhile, the cardiovascular, respiratory, metabolic, and neuromuscular demands of these methodologies remain largely unexplored compared to running-based HIIT (HIIT-R), cycling-based HIIT (HIIT-C), and traditional strength training with moderate (M-FT) and high (H-FT) loads in healthy, physically active adults. Therefore, before these methods can be applied to special populations (e.g., individuals with chronic cardiovascular or respiratory diseases, cancer, or older adults), it is essential to first understand their acute response in healthy, physically active individuals.