Skip to main content

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW article

Front. Physiol.
Sec. Exercise Physiology
Volume 15 - 2024 | doi: 10.3389/fphys.2024.1486526

Meta-analyses of the effects of high-intensity interval training in elite athletes -Part I: mean effects on various performance measures

Provisionally accepted
  • 1 Department of Sport and Exercise Science, University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria
  • 2 Institute of Nursing Science and Practice, Center for Public Health and Healthcare Research, Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria
  • 3 Institute of General Practice, Family Medicine and Preventive Medicine, Center for Public Health and Healthcare Research, Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria
  • 4 Red Bull Athlete Performance Center, Thalgau, Austria
  • 5 Department of Sports Medicine, Rehabilitation and Disease Prevention, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Mainz, Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany
  • 6 Internet Society for Sport Science, Auckland, New Zealand

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    Introduction: Meta-analysts have found that high-intensity interval training (HIIT) improves physical performance, but limited evidence exists for its effects on highly trained athletes, for measures beyond maximum oxygen uptake (V ̇O2max), and for moderating effects of different types of HIIT. Here, we present meta-analyses of the effects of HIIT focused on these deficits.Methods: Effects of six types of HIIT and other moderators from 34 studies of highly trained endurance and elite other athletes were derived in percent units via log-transformation from separate meta-regression mixed models for sprint, time-trial, aerobic/anaerobic threshold and peak speed/power, and for repeated-sprint ability, V ̇O2max, and exercise economy. Level of evidence for effect magnitudes was evaluated via effect uncertainty and a smallest important change of 1%. Results: Compared with control training, HIIT showed good to excellent evidence for substantial enhancement of most measures for some athlete subgroups in practically important study settings defined by effect moderators (maximum of 12.6%, for endurance females after six weeks of aerobic traditional long intervals). Assessment of the moderators indicated good evidence of greater effects, as follows: with more aerobic types of HIIT for V ̇O2max (+2.6%); with HIIT added to conventional training for most measures (+1.1 to 2.3%); during the competition phase for V ̇O2max (+4.3%); and with tests of longer duration for sprint (+5.5%) and time-trial (+4.9%). Sex and type of athlete were unclear moderators. Heterogeneity of HIIT effects within a given type of setting varied from small to moderate (standard deviations of 1.1 to 2.3%) and reduced the evidence of benefit in some settings.Although athletes in some settings can be confident of beneficial effects of HIIT on some measures related to competition performance, further research is needed. There is uncertainty in the mean effects on exercise economy and in the modifying effects of sex, duration of intervention, phase of training, and type of HIIT with most measures.

    Keywords: Meta-regression, Endurance, sprint, performance, Interval training, elite athletes

    Received: 26 Aug 2024; Accepted: 28 Oct 2024.

    Copyright: © 2024 Wiesinger, Stöggl, Haller, Blumkaitis, Strepp, Kilzer, Schmuttermair and Hopkins. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence: Hans-Peter Wiesinger, Department of Sport and Exercise Science, University of Salzburg, Salzburg, 5400, Salzburg, Austria

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.