# Impact of HIIT Sessions with and without Cognitive Load on Cortical Arousal, Accuracy and Perceived Exertion in Amateur Tennis Players

PMID: 35627904
Journal: Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland)
Published: 2022 Apr 21
Authors: Clemente-Suárez VJ, Villafaina S, García-Calvo T, Fuentes-García JP

## Question

Does adding a cognitive task during HIIT affect cortical arousal, tennis serve accuracy, and perceived exertion in amateur tennis players?

## Summary

In recreational tennis players, a bodyweight-style HIIT session paired with a Stroop cognitive task reduced serve accuracy compared with baseline and with the same HIIT session without the cognitive task. Both HIIT sessions raised perceived exertion, while cortical arousal measured by critical flicker fusion did not significantly change.

## Population

- Young amateur tennis players
- Sample size: 32
- Age: 21.40 +/- 1.52 years
- Sex: 25 men and 7 women
- Fitness level: Recreational tennis players
- Health status: Detailed health status not reported in extracted evidence

## Methodology

- Random-order repeated-measures acute comparison
- Two acute sessions separated by 48 hours
- Sports science testing environment with tennis serve testing
- Randomized and controlled study design.

## Protocol

- HIIT with cognitive load.
- Modality: Bodyweight exercises plus Stroop task.
- Work intervals: 30 seconds.
- Recovery: 30 seconds incongruent Stroop task.
- Sets or repetitions: 12.
- Intensity: High-intensity; post-session RPE about 14.44.
- Session duration: About 12 minutes for intervals.
- Frequency: Single condition session.
- Program length: Acute session.
- Progression: None.
- HIIT without cognitive load.
- Modality: Bodyweight exercises.
- Work intervals: 30 seconds.
- Recovery: 30 seconds passive rest.
- Sets or repetitions: 12.
- Intensity: High-intensity; post-session RPE about 14.53.
- Session duration: About 12 minutes for intervals.
- Frequency: Single condition session.
- Program length: Acute session.
- Progression: None.

## Outcomes

### Serve accuracy
Status: worse/safety concern
Serve accuracy was lower after HIIT with cognitive load than at baseline and after HIIT without cognitive load.

Baseline 19.64 +/- 16.53; no-load HIIT 17.86 +/- 13.58; cognitive-load HIIT 11.16 +/- 10.73; Friedman p=0.020; baseline vs cognitive p=0.034; no-load vs cognitive p=0.046.

### Perceived exertion
Status: mixed
RPE increased after both HIIT sessions but did not differ between the two HIIT conditions.

No-load 8.38 +/- 2.22 to 14.53 +/- 1.90, p<0.001; cognitive-load 9.06 +/- 2.34 to 14.44 +/- 2.31, p<0.001; between-session p=0.405.

### Cortical arousal
Status: no clear change
Critical flicker fusion threshold did not significantly change within or between HIIT conditions.

No-load p=0.278; cognitive-load p=0.135; between-change p=0.483.

## Practical Insights

- A 30:30 bodyweight HIIT structure can be paired with cognitive tasks, but precision performance may suffer immediately afterward.
- RPE alone may not reveal whether cognitive load is impairing sport-skill accuracy.
- Cognitive-load workouts should be placed away from training that requires immediate technical accuracy.

## Limitations

- Small sample.
- Few female participants and no sex-specific analysis.
- Recreational tennis sample only.
- Acute design with no training adaptation data.
- Serve accuracy was measured as a simple target-hit percentage.

## Safety And Adherence

- No adverse events were reported.
- Sessions were separated by 48 hours.

## Original Sources

- [PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35627904/) (pubmed)
- [DOI](https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10050767) (doi)
- [PMC full text](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9142095/) (full text)

## Agent Guidance

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