Effectiveness of different recovery postures during high-intensity interval training.

Abstract

High-intensity interval training (HIIT) has become a very popular mode of exercise practiced by the elite as well as recreationally active adults. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of four recovery postures that are typically used by exercisers on recovery rate and performance in subsequent bouts of HIIT. Sixteen young, healthy adults performed four HIIT trials with randomized recovery postures. Each trial consisted of four sets of modified Wingate anaerobic power tests (20-sec duration) on a cycle ergometer (Monark 894E, Vansbro, Sweden) separated by four-minute recovery between each exercise set. Participants adopted one of four recovery postures immediately following each set: standing still with hands on the back of the head (head), standing still with hands resting on knees (knees), slow walking with hands on hips (walking), or supine rest (supine). Differences were assessed by a two-way (posture × set) repeated measures analysis of variance. Peak and mean anaerobic power progressively declined within each set (P<0.05), with no differences between postures. Fatigue rate was significantly slower during supine (59±12%) than knees (63±13%). Heart rate recovery was faster (P<0.001) during supine than the other three standing postures. Pulmonary ventilation was not significantly different between postures. Blood lactate concentrations measured after HIIT were not significantly different between postures. Supine posture appears to be more advantageous in facilitating recovery when compared to the three standing postures. None of the recovery postures examined was responsible for better performance in subsequent bouts of HIIT.