Virtual Reality High-Intensity Interval Training Exergaming Compared to Traditional High-Intensity Circuit Training Among Medical Students: Pilot Crossover Study
Question
How does a VR HIIT boxing exergame compare with traditional high-intensity circuit training for acute physiological responses, motivation, perceived exertion, and simulator symptoms?
Summary
In 30 healthy medical students, a single VR HIIT boxing exergame session produced higher mean and peak heart rate than a traditional 7-minute bodyweight circuit, while the bodyweight circuit produced higher postexercise lactate. Motivation scores were mostly similar, and no adverse effects, including motion sickness, were reported. The study was acute, used highly specific VR software, and included conflicts of interest because two authors created the game/startup.
Methodology
- Thirty healthy medical students aged 18-30 from Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul School of Medicine; mean age 24 +/- 3 years, 18 male and 12 female, BMI 24.1 +/- 2.8. Participants were free from major psychiatric, cardiovascular, serious chronic, binocular vision, neuromuscular, recent injury, flu-like, or infectious conditions that could hinder HIIT.
- 30 participants.
- VR shadow-boxing HIIT and traditional bodyweight HICT.
- Work intervals: VR HIIT 16 sec; HICT 30 sec.
- Recovery: VR HIIT 20 sec passive rest; HICT 10 sec transition.
- Intensity: Self-selected all-out punching in VR; HICT self-selected effort in standardized circuit.
- Approximately 7 min plus 1 min cooldown for VR HIIT; approximately 7 min for HICT.
- Single acute comparison after familiarization.
- Pilot randomized crossover study
- Mean and peak heart rate during exercise, Blood lactate before and 5 min after exercise, RPE, and Simulator Sickness Questionnaire symptoms were tracked.
Outcomes
Mean heart rate
VR HIIT had higher mean HR than HICT: emmean 162 bpm (95% CI 157-166) vs 143 bpm (95% CI 138-147); p<.001, d=2.07.
95% CI 157-166) vs 143 bpm (95% CI 138-147)
Peak heart rate
VR HIIT had higher peak HR: 182 bpm (95% CI 178-187) vs 175 bpm (95% CI 170-180); p=.001, d=1.20.
95% CI 178-187) vs 175 bpm (95% CI 170-180)
Postexercise lactate
Postexercise lactate was higher after HICT: 10.6 mmol/L (95% CI 9.14-12.0) vs VR HIIT 8.83 mmol/L (95% CI 7.43-10.2); p=.006, d=.80.
95% CI 9
Perceived exertion
RPE was higher for VR HIIT: 16 (95% CI 15-17) vs HICT 15 (95% CI 14-16); p=.03, d=.61.
95% CI 15-17) vs HICT 15 (95% CI 14-16)
Motivation and fatigue
No significant differences were found for intrinsic motivation, identified regulation, external regulation, or amotivation; fatigue symptom was higher after VR HIIT.
Insights
- Gamified VR can elicit vigorous cardiovascular intensity in a short session while preserving immediate intrinsic motivation.
- Traditional bodyweight HICT may impose greater metabolic/lactate stress even with lower HR than VR boxing.
- Conflict-of-interest context should be surfaced when using this evidence for product claims.
Limitations
- Acute pilot crossover only; no long-term adherence or health outcomes.
- Highly active/healthy medical student sample may create ceiling effects for motivation.
- Simulator sickness and motivation questionnaires lacked baseline symptom/motivation measurement.
- Comparison was VR HIIT vs HICT rather than VR HIIT vs non-VR matched boxing HIIT.
- Financial/product conflicts related to the studied exergame.
Safety
- No adverse effects were reported, particularly concerning motion sickness.
- Chewing gum was provided only at familiarization as an initial motion-sickness preventive measure; no participants reported motion-sickness symptoms.