Physiological, perceived, and physical demands of recreational 3 x 3 basketball and high-intensity interval training in sedentary adult women
Question
How do acute physiological, perceived, and physical demands compare between recreational 3 x 3 basketball and a gym-based HIIT session in sedentary adult women?
Summary
In sedentary adult women, one recreational 3 x 3 basketball session produced a higher heart-rate response than a short bodyweight HIIT session, while perceived exertion and enjoyment were similar. This was an acute study, so it does not show long-term fitness or adherence effects.
Methodology
- Healthy sedentary adult women
- 12 participants.
- Bodyweight and shuttle circuit.
- Work intervals: 30 s.
- Recovery: 30 s.
- Intensity: As many rounds as possible.
- 12 min plus warm-up.
- Single acute session.
- Single session.
- Randomized-order acute comparison study
- Heart-rate response, Blood lactate, and Enjoyment were tracked.
Outcomes
Heart rate
Both sessions were vigorous, but basketball produced higher percent HRpeak than HIIT.
HIIT 86.6 +/- 4.8% versus basketball 93.6 +/- 1.9%; p<0.001.
RPE
Perceived exertion did not differ between HIIT and basketball.
Median 4 +/- 1 in both conditions; p=0.999.
Enjoyment
Enjoyment did not differ significantly between conditions.
HIIT 5 +/- 2 versus basketball 6 +/- 1; p=0.233.
Insights
- A short 30:30 bodyweight HIIT circuit can reach vigorous intensity in inactive adult women.
- Game-based exercise may create even higher acute heart-rate load without lower enjoyment.
- Acute enjoyment should not be treated as proof of long-term adherence.
Limitations
- Small sample
- Female-only sample
- Acute-only design
- No long-term adherence or fitness outcomes
Safety
- No explicit adverse-event statement was found in the extracted NXML.