# Recovery from Different High-Intensity Interval Training Protocols: Comparing Well-Trained Women and Men

PMID: 33801440
Journal: Sports
Published: 2021 Mar 2
Authors: Hottenrott L, Möhle M, Ide A, Ketelhut S, Stoll O, Hottenrott K

## Question

Do well-trained women and men differ in metabolic, cardiovascular, subjective, and performance recovery after repeated 30-second high-intensity cycling intervals with 1, 3, or 10 minutes of active recovery?

## Summary

In well-trained cyclists and triathletes, repeated 30-second all-out Wingate intervals produced different recovery patterns by sex: women showed lower lactate and smaller performance decline, while men had faster heart-rate and subjective recovery.

## Population

- Well-trained cyclists and triathletes.
- Sample size: 22
- Age: Women 31.7 +/- 10.0 years; men 33.5 +/- 10.2 years
- Sex: 11 women and 11 men
- Fitness level: Well-trained endurance athletes
- Health status: Apparently healthy athletes; screened for interfering medication/supplement use

## Methodology

- Randomized-order repeated-measures laboratory crossover study
- Three HIIT test sessions separated by one week, after baseline testing
- Laboratory cycling ergometer testing
- Randomized and controlled study design.

## Protocol

- Repeated Wingate HIIT.
- Modality: Cycle ergometer.
- Work intervals: 30 s all-out Wingate.
- Recovery: 1, 3, or 10 min active recovery.
- Sets or repetitions: 4.
- Intensity: All-out.
- Session duration: Protocol-dependent; 2 min hard work plus active recovery and cooldown.
- Frequency: Three randomized test protocols, one week apart.
- Program length: Acute crossover testing.
- Progression: None.
- Alternative active recovery durations.
- Modality: Cycle ergometer.
- Work intervals: 30 s all-out Wingate.
- Recovery: 1, 3, or 10 min active recovery.
- Sets or repetitions: 4.
- Intensity: All-out.
- Session duration: Protocol-dependent.
- Frequency: One week apart.
- Program length: Acute crossover testing.
- Progression: None.

## Outcomes

### Power
Status: mixed
Power maintenance improved as recovery duration increased; performance drop did not show a sex interaction.

Recovery-duration main effect p<0.001; performance drop x sex p=0.49.

### Lactate
Status: mixed
Men had higher lactate than women with 3 and 10 min recovery, but not 1 min recovery.

3 min p=0.04; 10 min p=0.004.

### Heart-rate recovery
Status: mixed
Women had slower heart-rate recovery with 3 and 10 min recovery.

Sex differences at 3 and 10 min p<0.001.

### Subjective recovery
Status: mixed
Perceived recovery improved with longer recovery and differed by sex in the 1 and 10 min protocols.

TQR sex differences: 1 min p<0.001; 10 min p=0.03.

## Practical Insights

- Recovery length materially changes repeated sprint performance.
- Heart-rate recovery and perceived recovery can be slower even when lactate recovery is faster.
- All-out Wingate evidence should be translated cautiously for non-athletes.

## Limitations

- Small athlete-only sample
- Acute laboratory study rather than chronic training trial
- No sedentary or clinical participants
- Protocol depends on cycle ergometer Wingate testing

## Safety And Adherence

- No intervention-related adverse events were reported.
- Two athletes, one male and one female, dropped out because of injuries that were not related to the study intervention.
- Participants were screened by medical questionnaire and monitored continuously for heart rate/RR intervals and gas exchange during testing.

## Original Sources

- [PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33801440/) (pubmed)
- [DOI](https://doi.org/10.3390/sports9030034) (doi)
- [PMC full text](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8000557/) (full text)

## Agent Guidance

Preserve the paper-level scope of this note. Do not generalize beyond the population, protocol, measured outcomes, and limitations above.