PMID 41735920

Research
All papers

Feasibility of a school-based peer-led high-intensity interval training intervention: the Young Fitness Leaders project

Weston KL, Burn NL, Goroski A, Weston M, Galna B, Glossop R, Patterson M, Batten H, Gordon A, Basterfield L

Question

Is a peer-led school HIIT intervention feasible and acceptable, and does it show signals for improving fitness or psychological outcomes?

Summary

This school feasibility study tested whether older pupils could lead short HIIT sessions for Year 7 pupils. Recruitment and retention were workable and pupils generally liked the peer-led format, especially boxing-style sessions, but the sessions often did not reach the intended heart-rate intensity.

Methodology

  • Year 7 pupils receiving the intervention and Year 12-13 pupils acting as Young Fitness Leaders in a deprived-area school in North East England
  • 44 participants.
  • Bodyweight and non-contact boxing.
  • Work intervals: About 45 seconds initially, progressing by 5 seconds every fortnight.
  • Recovery: 60 seconds.
  • Intensity: Target >=85% age-predicted HRmax.
  • 15 minutes.
  • 2 sessions/week.
  • 8 weeks.
  • Non-randomized controlled feasibility study
  • Feasibility, Intensity fidelity, Fitness signals, and Safety were tracked.

Outcomes

Feasibility

Recruitment, retention, and acceptability supported feasibility.

Recruitment: 72% peer recipients, 74% controls, 42% leaders; retention 94%.

Improved

Fidelity heart rate

The intervention often missed the intended HIIT threshold.

Mean peak HR was 76% age-predicted maximum; 26% of monitored repetitions reached >=85%.

Safety concern

Fitness signals

Fitness outcome estimates were small and imprecise.

20mSRT effect 2.2 shuttles, 95% CI -2.5 to 6.8.

Unclear

Insights

  • Short peer-led HIIT can fit into school-day slots, but physiological intensity needs active coaching.
  • Non-contact boxing may be more engaging than generic bodyweight intervals.
  • Scheduling and clothing context can affect acceptability as much as exercise design.

Limitations

  • Non-randomized allocation.
  • One school in a deprived area.
  • Small sample and few peer leaders.
  • Feasibility design not powered for efficacy.
  • Low heart-rate fidelity.

Safety

  • No intervention-related injuries or adverse events occurred.