Purpose
High-intensity interval training (HIIT) has proven to be effective in improving endurance capacity and muscle endurance. However, its potential to improve other aspects of physical performance such as strength and power has not been well explored, and most research studies used only running and cycling as exercise modalities. Here, we compared the effects of jumping versus running as exercise modalities during a 6-week HIIT.
Methods
46 participants (24±3 years, 171±9 cm, 68±13 kg, 22 women) were randomly allocated to one of three groups: countermovement jump training, running training, or control. The two training groups underwent a 6-week HIIT with 3 training sessions per week. Both training protocols had identical training frequency, number of series and work/rest durations (on average 7 series of 25s, with a rest of 25s between series). Before and after the training period, aerobic capacity and neuromuscular performance were assessed.
Results
Analyses of variance revealed a significant group*time interaction effect for maximal aerobic capacity (p = 0.004), and post hoc analyses showed a significant increase in the running group (p < .001, +7.6%). Analyses of the maximal voluntary contraction revealed only a significant increase in the jumping group (plantar flexion +12.8%, knee extension +8.2%). No interaction effects were found for maximal power or jump height.
Conclusion
Despite identical programming, the choice of exercise mode profoundly affected the training adaptations: the running group significantly increased aerobic capacity, and the jump group significantly increased leg strength. These results underline the importance of exercise modality in physical performance adaptations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.