# Physiological, perceived, and physical demands of recreational 3 x 3 basketball and high-intensity interval training in sedentary adult women

PMID: 41048231
Journal: Biology of Sport
Published: 2025-04-14
Authors: Golluceli B, Kamandulis S, Pernigoni M, Lukonaitiene I, Kreivyte R, Conte D

## 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.

## Population

- Healthy sedentary adult women
- Sample size: 12
- Age: 37 +/- 14 years
- Sex: Female
- Fitness level: Sedentary/inactive
- Health status: Healthy by screening

## Methodology

- Randomized-order acute comparison study
- Two acute experimental sessions separated by 1 week
- Indoor basketball court and gym-based testing environment
- Randomized and controlled study design.

## Protocol

- HIIT.
- Modality: Bodyweight and shuttle circuit.
- Work intervals: 30 s.
- Recovery: 30 s.
- Sets or repetitions: 4 sets of three alternating bouts.
- Intensity: As many rounds as possible.
- Session duration: 12 min plus warm-up.
- Frequency: Single acute session.
- Program length: Single session.
- Progression: None.
- 3 x 3 basketball.
- Modality: Recreational half-court basketball.
- Work intervals: Game play.
- Recovery: Game stoppages.
- Sets or repetitions: One game to 10 min or 21 points.
- Intensity: Self-paced game play.
- Session duration: 10 min plus warm-up.
- Frequency: Single acute session.
- Program length: Single session.
- Progression: None.

## Outcomes

### Heart rate
Status: mixed
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
Status: no clear change
Perceived exertion did not differ between HIIT and basketball.

Median 4 +/- 1 in both conditions; p=0.999.

### Enjoyment
Status: no clear change
Enjoyment did not differ significantly between conditions.

HIIT 5 +/- 2 versus basketball 6 +/- 1; p=0.233.

## Practical 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 And Adherence

- No explicit adverse-event statement was found in the extracted NXML.

## Original Sources

- [PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41048231/) (pubmed)
- [DOI](https://doi.org/10.5114/biolsport.2025.148547) (doi)
- [PMC full text](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12490309/) (full text)

## Agent Guidance

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