Effectiveness of Training Prescription Guided by Heart Rate Variability Versus Predefined Training for Physiological and Aerobic Performance Improvements: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Juan Pablo Medellín Ruiz,Vicente Javier Clemente-Suarez,Domingo Jesús Ramos-Campo,Jacobo Ángel Rubio-Arias

doi:10.3390/app10238532

Juan Pablo Medellín Ruiz, Vicente Javier Clemente-Suarez + Show 2 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3390/app10238532

Copy DOI

Abstract

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to determine if heart rate variability-guided training (HRV-g), compared to predefined training (PT), maximizes the further improvement of endurance physiological and performance markers in healthy individuals. This analysis included randomized controlled trials assessing the effects of HRV-g vs. PT on endurance physiological and performance markers in untrained, physically active, and well-trained subjects. Eight articles qualified for inclusion. HRV-g training significantly improved maximum oxygen uptake (VO2max) (MD = 2.84, CI: 1.41, 4.27; p < 0.0001), maximum aerobic power or speed (WMax) (SMD = 0.66, 95% CI 0.33, 0.98; p < 0.0001), aerobic performance (SMD = 0.71, CI 0.16, 1.25; p = 0.01) and power or speed at ventilatory thresholds (VT) VT1 (SMD = 0.62, CI 0.04, 1.20; p = 0.04) and VT2 (SMD = 0.81, CI 0.41, 1.22; p < 0.0001). However, HRV-g did not show significant differences in VO2max (MD = 0.96, CI −1.11, 3.03; p = 0.36), WMax (SMD = 0.06, CI −0.26, 0.38; p = 0.72), or aerobic performance (SMD = 0.14, CI −0.22, 0.51; p = 0.45) in power or speed at VT1 (SMD = 0.27, 95% CI −0.16, 0.70; p = 0.22) or VT2 (SMD = 0.18, 95% CI −0.20, 0.57; p = 0.35), when compared to PT. Although HRV-based training periodization improved both physiological variables and aerobic performance, this method did not provide significant benefit over PT.

Highlights

To maximize the physical fitness of athletes, correct management of training program variables is needed [1]
The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine if endurance heart rate variability-guided training (HRV-g) maximizes aerobic performance and/or aerobic physiological adaptation, compared to a predefined training (PT) program
These findings do not appear to support the use of Heart rate variability (HRV)-g over PT programs, this study highlights notable differences in the methodologies used between studies, which may impact the potential efficacy of HRV-g

Summary

Introduction

To maximize the physical fitness of athletes, correct management of training program variables (i.e., volume, intensity, frequency, density, etc.) is needed [1]. The optimal training dosage promotes physiological adaptations and reduces the risk of injury and overtraining syndrome, improving athletic performance [2]. The rational distribution of training sessions would be the pillar to obtain the correct physiological modifications in athletes [3]. Several training periodization strategies have been applied to manage the training load and obtain performance enhancement [4].

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion