Exergaming can be an innovative way of enjoyable high-intensity interval training
Question
Can a newly developed biking exergame elicit high-intensity exercise while remaining enjoyable compared with brisk walking?
Summary
Eight young men played a multiplayer cycling exergame and walked briskly on three separate days in counterbalanced order. The game produced higher heart rate, energy expenditure, perceived exertion, enjoyment, and voluntary duration than walking, with participants spending meaningful time above 80% and 90% of estimated HRmax.
Methodology
- Eight male university students familiar with computer games.
- 8 participants.
- Stationary cycling game.
- Work intervals: Game rounds up to 2 minutes.
- Recovery: 15 seconds between games and 3 minutes between best-of-5 rounds.
- Intensity: Self-selected; average 73% HRmax, maximum 91% HRmax.
- Minimum 15 minutes, self-selected up to 60 minutes; mean 44.3 minutes.
- Three acute trials.
- Acute repeated-measures study.
- Pilot randomized counterbalanced within-subject acute study
- Heart rate, HR zones, Enjoyment, and Energy expenditure were tracked.
Outcomes
Heart rate
PLAY produced higher average and maximum HR than WALK.
Average HR p=0.01; max HR p<0.01.
Red-zone time
PLAY included substantial time at 80-89% and >=90% HRmax; WALK did not.
Both zones p=0.01 for PLAY vs WALK.
Enjoyment
PLAY was rated much more enjoyable than WALK.
VAS 8.7 +/- 0.1 vs 3.9 +/- 1.8, p=0.01.
Duration
Participants voluntarily continued PLAY much longer than WALK.
44.3 +/- 0.7 vs 17.0 +/- 0.7 minutes, p=0.01.
Insights
- Game mechanics can make high exertion feel worth continuing.
- Self-selected gamified cycling can generate interval-like HR patterns.
- Novelty and participant game interest are major caveats.
Limitations
- Only eight participants.
- Male university students familiar with gaming.
- Acute-only design.
- Prototype game not commercially available.
- Energy expenditure and HRmax were estimated.
- Walking comparator was not intensity-matched.
Safety
- No adverse events were reported in the viewed text.
- Estimated HRmax was used rather than directly measured HRmax.