PMID 42125178

Research
All papers

Cardiometabolic response to high intensity functional training versus rowing-based high intensity interval training

Astorino TA, Mower M, Flores A, Flannery M

Question

How do acute cardiometabolic and perceptual responses differ between duration-matched bodyweight HIFT and rowing HIIT?

Summary

In 22 habitually active adults, one acute bodyweight high-intensity functional training session and one rowing HIIT session produced similar peak oxygen uptake. HIFT produced higher peak heart rate, ventilation, blood lactate, perceived exertion, and less positive affect, while rowing produced higher mean oxygen uptake and energy expenditure.

Methodology

  • Twenty-two healthy habitually active adults
  • 22 participants.
  • Pushups, jump squats, mountain climbers, air squats.
  • Work intervals: One circuit lasting about 1 minute.
  • Recovery: 75 seconds walking in place.
  • Intensity: As fast as possible.
  • About 13 minutes for intervals and recoveries.
  • Single acute session.
  • Acute crossover.
  • Randomized crossover acute exercise study
  • Oxygen uptake, Blood lactate, Perception, and Heart rate were tracked.

Outcomes

Peak VO2

Peak VO2 was similar between HIFT and rowing HIIT.

81% vs 82% VO2max; p=0.72.

No clear change

Peak HR

HIFT produced higher peak HR and more time at or above 85% HRmax.

Peak HR p=0.002; time >=85% HRmax p=0.03.

Improved

Lactate

HIFT produced higher blood lactate during and after exercise.

p<0.001.

Improved

Affect

HIFT felt harder and less pleasant than rowing HIIT.

RPE higher after intervals 3 and 6; affect post-exercise p=0.004.

Safety concern

Insights

  • A bodyweight HIFT circuit can reach very high HR and lactate in active adults.
  • Higher physiological stress came with higher RPE and lower affective valence.
  • Rowing HIIT may produce higher mean VO2 and energy expenditure than all-out HIFT.

Limitations

  • Acute-only design.
  • Healthy active sample, not inactive or clinical.
  • Specific protocols and recovery modes limit generalization.
  • Post-exercise metabolic monitoring lasted only 15 minutes.
  • Adverse-event reporting was not explicit.

Safety

  • Adverse events were not explicitly reported.
  • Participants were screened with a health-history questionnaire and PAR-Q; pregnancy or conditions precluding participation were exclusionary.
  • Of 24 who consented, one male did not complete HIFT and one female learned she was pregnant after baseline testing; 22 completed all requirements.