# Performance and Recovery of Well-Trained Younger and Older Athletes during Different HIIT Protocols

PMID: 35050974
Journal: Sports
Published: 2022 Jan 5
Authors: Hottenrott L, Möhle M, Feichtinger S, Ketelhut S, Stoll O, Hottenrott K

## Question

Do younger and older well-trained athletes with comparable fitness recover differently during repeated 30-second Wingate HIIT protocols with different active recovery durations?

## Summary

In 12 younger and 12 older well-trained cyclists and triathletes with comparable relative fitness, three randomized repeated-Wingate HIIT sessions with 1, 3, or 10 minutes active recovery produced similar metabolic, cardiovascular, and subjective recovery patterns between age groups. Longer recovery reduced fatigue and perceived exertion and improved perceived recovery.

## Population

- Well-trained younger and older cyclists and triathletes.
- Sample size: 24
- Age: Younger 24.5 +/- 3.7 years; older 47.3 +/- 8.6 years
- Sex: 16 men and 8 women total; each age group 8 men and 4 women
- Fitness level: Well-trained, VO2max above 80th percentile
- Health status: Apparently healthy athletes

## Methodology

- Randomized order repeated-measures laboratory study
- Four laboratory visits; three HIIT sessions each separated by one week
- Standardized laboratory cycling ergometry
- Randomized and controlled study design.

## Protocol

- Repeated Wingate HIIT.
- Modality: Cycle ergometry.
- Work intervals: 30 seconds maximal Wingate.
- Recovery: 1, 3, or 10 minutes active recovery.
- Sets or repetitions: 4 Wingates.
- Intensity: Maximal all-out.
- Session duration: About 25.5-52.5 minutes including warmup/cooldown depending on recovery duration.
- Frequency: Three laboratory sessions separated by one week.
- Program length: Three acute protocol visits.
- Progression: None; randomized order.
- Alternative active recovery durations.
- Modality: Cycle ergometry.
- Work intervals: 30 seconds maximal Wingate.
- Recovery: 1, 3, or 10 minutes active recovery.
- Sets or repetitions: 4 Wingates.
- Intensity: Maximal all-out.
- Session duration: Varied by recovery duration.
- Frequency: Within-subject randomized visits.
- Program length: Three acute protocol visits.
- Progression: None.

## Outcomes

### Age recovery
Status: no clear change
Younger and older athletes recovered similarly across metabolic, cardiovascular, and subjective measures.

Between-age differences p>0.05 for average lactate, power, fatigue, %HRmax, RER, RPE, and TQR

### Rest duration
Status: improved
Longer recovery reduced RPE and increased perceived recovery.

RPE and TQR differed across recovery durations, often p<0.001

### Power decline
Status: worse/safety concern
Performance decline was greatest with 1-minute recovery.

Recovery-duration main effect F(2,44)=63.59, p<0.001

## Practical Insights

- When maintaining power is the goal, longer active recovery is useful.
- Comparable fitness may matter more than age for recovery in trained adults up to about 50.
- All-out Wingate protocols are not entry-level HIIT.

## Limitations

- Small athlete sample.
- Men and women analyzed together.
- Female menstrual-cycle phase not standardized.
- Older group was middle-aged rather than elderly.
- Only active recovery and 30-second Wingates were studied.

## Safety And Adherence

- Adverse events and injuries were not reported.
- Participants were well-trained athletes tested under standardized lab conditions with HR, gas exchange, lactate, RPE, and recovery monitoring.
- The protocol used maximal Wingate efforts and should be considered advanced.

## Original Sources

- [PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35050974/) (pubmed)
- [DOI](https://doi.org/10.3390/sports10010009) (doi)
- [PMC full text](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8822894/) (full text)

## Agent Guidance

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