High-Intensity Interval Training vs. Superset Training

Abstract

High-intensity interval training (HIIT) is used as an alternative to traditional endurance training to increase cardiorespiratory fitness and energy expenditure, however, much less in known about HIIT resistance training (RT). In contrast, superset (SUPER) RT programs, consisting of performing two consecutive exercises on opposing muscle groups while limiting the rest duration between exercises, are common for both hypertrophy and energy expenditure. PURPOSE: To compare the energy expenditure between an acute bout of HIIT and SUPER RT. METHODS: Twelve males (23.91±3.58 y) with at least six months of RT experience completed one-repetition maximum testing and an acute bout of both HIIT and SUPER RT. To ensure volume load (VL) was not different for both protocols, HIIT was always performed first so that VL could be calculated and the number of repetitions for each exercise in the SUPER session could be determined. At least 72 hours rest was taken between the HIIT and SUPER RT protocols. Oxygen consumption (VO2), respiratory exchange ratio (RER), rate of perceived exertion (RPE), total kcal (aerobic), and heart rate (HR) were each collected at rest and after every set throughout each exercise session including between the paired sets in SUPER. Whole blood lactate measures were taken during both sessions at baseline and two-minutes post-exercise. RESULTS: Significant differences were seen between HIIT and SUPER RT: Total overall energy expenditure (346±47.4 vs. 295.5±45.65 kcal, p=0.005), aerobic (132.1±13.03 vs. 157.2±15.98 kcal, p<0.0001), anaerobic (214.3±42.33 vs. 142.8±43.08 kcal, p=0.0002), RER (1.29±0.17 vs. 1.18±0.17, p=<0.0001), post-exercise lactate (15.56±2.49 vs. 10.83±2.42 mmol, p<0.0001), and RPE (14.81±3.41 vs. 12.73±3.81, p=0.001), respectfully, when comparing protocols. There were no significant differences in VO2 or HR. CONCLUSION: HIIT elicited higher total energy expenditure than SUPER despite an overall shorter duration (13:16±00:02 vs. 14:45±00:51, p<0.0001) and a lower one-repetition maximum percentage for each exercise.