What question did this study set out to answer?

The research aims to compare physiological and locomotor adaptations to HIIT and SIT and assess how locomotor profiles affect these adaptations.

February 13, 2026

Locomotor Profile Influences Physiological and Locomotor Adaptations After 6 Weeks of High-Intensity or Sprint Interval Training in Male and Female Runners

MTMaximiliane ThronKarlsruhe Institute of Technology YSYannick SondermannKarlsruhe Institute of Technology LRLudwig RufTSG Solutions (United States)

Key Points

The research aims to compare physiological and locomotor adaptations to HIIT and SIT and assess how locomotor profiles affect these adaptations.
Twenty-seven trained male and female runners participated in 6 weeks of HIIT or SIT training.
HIIT consisted of 4–6 intervals of 4 minutes at 90%-95% MAS, while SIT included 6–10 all-out 20-second sprints.
Pretest and posttests measured sprinting speeds and physiological variables using treadmill tests.
Linear mixed models and moderation analyses were applied to assess outcomes.
Both HIIT and SIT significantly improved maximal aerobic speed (MAS).
Only SIT showed enhancements in maximal sprinting speed (MSS).
HIIT increased lactate thresholds more than SIT.
Speed types (higher speed reserve ratio) showed greater improvements in MAS and lactate thresholds than endurance types (lower speed reserve ratio).
Within SIT, endurance types improved MSS more than speed types, while speed types benefited more from HIIT.

Abstract

Purpose : High-intensity interval training (HIIT) and sprint interval training (SIT) can improve physiological (eg, maximal oxygen uptake ) and locomotor (eg, maximal aerobic speed, MAS; maximal sprinting speed, MSS) variables. However, the influence of an athlete’s locomotor profile on training adaptations to HIIT and SIT remains unclear. We aimed to (1) compare physiological and locomotor adaptations to HIIT and SIT and (2) assess how locomotor profiles affect these adaptations. Methods : Twenty-seven trained male and female runners (27.7 7.5 y; n = 12 women) completed 6 weeks of HIIT (4–6 × 4 min @90%–95% MAS) or SIT (6–10 × 20-s all-out sprints), performed twice weekly. Pretest and posttests included 40-m sprinting (MSS) and incremental treadmill tests ( , MAS, lactate thresholds eg, v4mmo). Anaerobic speed reserve was calculated as MSS minus MAS and speed reserve ratio as MSS divided by MAS. Linear mixed models and moderation analyses were performed. Results : Both HIIT and SIT significantly improved MAS ( P ≤ .03). While only SIT enhanced MSS (interaction: P < .01), HIIT increased v4mmol ( P < .01). In both groups, speed types (ie, higher speed reserve ratio and anaerobic speed reserve) showed greater MAS ( P < .01) and v4mmol increases ( P < .05) than endurance types (ie, lower speed reserve ratio and anaerobic speed reserve). Within the SIT group, endurance types improved MSS ( P < .01) and more, while speed types increased more with HIIT (interaction: P ≤ .03). Conclusion : HIIT and SIT improve endurance outcomes in trained runners. Adaptations vary depending on locomotor profile, with speed types responding better to HIIT and endurance types benefiting more from SIT. Accordingly, individualizing training by locomotor profile may optimize outcomes.

AI से पूछें

Bookmark

View Full Paper