Journal of Human Kinetics volume 56/2017, 127-137 DOI: 10.

1515/hukin-2017-0030 127
Section II‐ Exercise Physiology & Sports Medicine

Physiological Acute Response to High‐Intensity Intermittent

and Moderate‐Intensity Continuous 5 km Running Performance:
Implications for Training Prescription

by
Carolina Cabral-Santos , José Gerosa-Neto1, Daniela S. Inoue1, Fabrício E. Rossi1,
1

Jason M. Cholewa2, Eduardo Z. Campos3, Valéria L. G. Panissa4, Fábio S. Lira1

The aim of this study was to investigate the physiological responses to moderate-intensity continuous and
high-intensity intermittent exercise. Twelve physically active male subjects were recruited and completed a 5-km run
on a treadmill in two experimental sessions in randomized order: continuously (70% sVO2max) and intermittently (1:1
min at sVO2max). Oxygen uptake, excess post-exercise oxygen consumption, lactate concentration, heart rate and rating
of perceived exertion data were recorded during and after each session. The lactate levels exhibited higher values
immediately post-exercise than at rest (High-Intensity: 1.43 ± 0.25 to 7.36 ± 2.78; Moderate-Intensity: 1.64 ± 1.01 to
4.05 ± 1.52 mmol·L-1, p = 0.0004), but High-Intensity promoted higher values (p = 0.001) than Moderate-Intensity.
There was a difference across time on oxygen uptake at all moments tested in both groups (High-Intensity: 100.19 ±
8.15L; Moderate-Intensity: 88.35 ± 11.46, p < 0.001). Both exercise conditions promoted increases in excess post-
exercise oxygen consumption (High-Intensity: 6.61 ± 1.85 L; Moderate-Intensity: 5.32 ± 2.39 L, p < 0.005), but higher
values were observed in the High-Intensity exercise protocol. High-Intensity was more effective at modifying the heart
rate and rating of perceived exertion (High-Intensity: 183 ± 12.54 and 19; Moderate-Intensity: 172 ± 8.5 and 16,
respectively, p < 0.05). In conclusion, over the same distance, Moderate-Intensity and High-Intensity exercise exhibited
different lactate concentrations, heart rate and rating of perceived exertion. As expected, the metabolic contribution also
differed, and High-Intensity induced higher energy expenditure, however, the total duration of the session may have to
be taken into account. Moreover, when following moderate-intensity training, the percentage of sVO2max and the
anaerobic threshold might influence exercise and training responses.
Key words: physiologic responses, energy expenditure, lactate concentration, high intensity intermittent exercise,
acute exercise, excess post-exercise oxygen uptake.

Introduction
The implementation of low to moderate have demonstrated the benefits of moderate-
intensity and long duration continuous efforts has intensity continuous exercise (MICE) on body
been classically prescribed for the maintenance or composition, metabolic risk factors and
improvement of aerobic capacity and health improving maximum oxygen uptake (VO2max).
promotion in different populations (Haskell et al., MICE promotes metabolic health via anti-
2007; Nelson et al., 2007). Several meta-analyses inflammatory effects, increasing the activity of

1 - Exercise and Immunometabolism Research Group, Department of Physical Education, Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP),
São Paulo, Brazil.
2 - Department of Kinesiology, Coastal Carolina University, Conway, SC, USA.

3 - Department of Physical Education – Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Recife – PE, Brazil.

4 - Department of Sports, School of Physical Education and Sports, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.

.
Authors submitted their contribution to the article to the editorial board.
Accepted for printing in the Journal of Human Kinetics vol. 56/2017 in March 2017.
128 Physiological acute response to high-intensity intermittent and moderate-intensity....

aerobic enzymes, intramuscular glycogen, investigated whether HIIE training performed at

mitochondrial and capillary densities in the higher intensity (i.e., 100% of maximal aerobic
muscles, oxidation of lipids in skeletal muscle and speed) and with the same volume as MICE results
the liver as well as improvement in aerobic in different physiological responses and metabolic
capacity (Ismail et al., 2012; Kelley et al., 2006; adaptations during and after training,
Kelley and Kelley, 2008; Thorogood et al., 2011). respectively. Thus, the objective of this study was
As such, the American College of Sports Medicine to compare the effects of 5 km MICE and HIIE on
and the American Heart Association both the physiological responses in young adults. Our
recommend 30 min or more of MICE (64-76% of hypothesis was that HIIE would present greater
maximal heart rate or 46-63% of VO2max) physiological responses than MICE after an iso-
preferably every day of the week for protection volume exercise.
against chronic diseases and at least 60–90 min of
moderate-intensity activity daily to sustain weight
Material and Methods
loss in adults who have lost substantial body Participants
weight. Twelve physically active male subjects
High-intensity interval exercise (HIIE) has (age 23.22 ± 5.47 years, body height 1.73 ± 0.06 m,
been used as an interesting method for improving body mass 74.60 ± 6.61 kg, body mass index 24.63
health markers, VO2max and oxidative capacity, ± 1.97 kg·m2-1 and peak oxygen uptake 58.58 ± 5.60
since similar or greater effects are induced during ml·kg·min-1) volunteered to participate in this
low volume high intensity exercise (i.e., ≤10 study. They presented a health and
minutes of intensive exercise) (Burgomaster et al., neuromuscular status which demonstrated their
2008; Gibala et al., 2006) when compared to the ability to complete the study protocol. All
traditional MICE (vigorous intensity: 77-95% of procedures performed in the study were in
the maximal heart rate or 64-90% of VO2max) accordance with the ethical standards of the
(Garber et al., 2011). Both protocols 4-6 x 30 s University Research Ethics Committee of the São
Wingate with 4 minutes of recovery as well as 10 Paulo State University (UNESP) – Campus
x 60 s at 90% of maximal heart rate interspersed Presidente Prudente for studies involving human
with 60 s of recovery have been used for HIIT to participants and followed the principles outlined
improve glucose control and metabolic and in the Declaration of Helsinki. Written informed
vascular risk factors in overweight/obese consent was obtained from all subjects after they
sedentary men and patients with type 2 diabetes had been informed about the purpose and risks of
(Little et al., 2011; Whyte et al., 2010); although the the study.
10 x 60 s protocol is considered more feasible than Procedures
all-out efforts for different types of populations, Subjects completed three experimental
due to its effectiveness, safety reports and easy trials in the laboratory. The first visit aimed to
adherence. determine peak oxygen uptake (VO2max) and the
When physically active subjects perform speed associated with VO2max (sVO2max). During
MICE, they may run for approximately 5 km the remaining two visits, all subjects were
(mean of 70% of maximal aerobic speed), while submitted randomly to two 5 km running
the HIIE volume is significantly lower than that protocols on a treadmill: high-intensity interval
performed during MICE (Burgomaster et al., 2008; exercise (HIIE) and moderate-intensity
Gibala et al., 2006), which induces a reduction in continuous exercise (MICE), separated by at least
energy expenditure during training (352 ± 34 72 h. All tests took place at the same time of the
versus 547 ± 65 kJ respectively; p < 0.001), without day, between 1:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m., at an
a difference in excess post-exercise oxygen average temperature of between 20 and 24ºC. The
consumption (EPOC) (Skelly et al., 2014). subjects were instructed to abstain from strenuous
However, Skelly et al. (2014) observed relatively exercise for at least 24 hours prior to each exercise
lower intensity during the HIIE (i.e., 77 ± 3% of session, and maintain their usual nutritional and
peak power output) than suggested. hydration routines. Moreover, they were also
In this sense, aiming to induce higher requested not to consume stimulants (tea, coffee,
aerobic adaptation to training, no study has soda, chocolate, chocolate powder) or alcoholic

Journal of Human Kinetics - volume 56/2017 http://www.johk.pl

by Carolina Cabra-Santos et al. 129

beverages during this period. venipuncture to measure lactate concentration.

Maximal endurance running test The highest lactate value ([La-]) measured was
The subjects were submitted to an considered the peak lactate concentration ([La-
incremental test on a treadmill (Inbramed ]peak). The difference between the [La-]peak and
MASTER CI, Inbrasport®, Porto Alegre, Brazil). pre exercise lactate concentration ([La-]rest) was
The test initial speed was 8 km·h-1, and increased expressed as net lactate accumulation (Δ[La-]). A
by 1 km·h-1 every 2 min until volitional metabolic equivalent of 3 mLO2·kg-1 for each 1
exhaustion. Strong verbal encouragement was mmol·L-1 of Δ[La-] was considered as the
given during the test. The oxygen uptake was anaerobic lactic contribution (Di Prampero and
measured (Quark PFT, Cosmed®, Rome, Italy) Ferretti, 1999).
throughout the test and the average of the final 30 For the anaerobic alactic contribution, the
seconds was defined as VO2max. The sVO2max was fast component of excess post-exercise oxygen
assumed as the final incremental test speed. When consumption was determined using a modified
the subject did not complete a stage, the speed bi-exponential decay equation. The anaerobic
was expressed according to the time spent in the alactic contribution corresponded to the product
final stage, determined as follow: sVO2max = speed of bi-exponential fast component amplitude and
of the final complete stage + [(time, in seconds, tau (Bertuzzi et al., 2007; Zagatto et al., 2011). The
remaining in the final incomplete stage / 120 s) * 1 aerobic metabolism was estimated by subtracting
km·h-1] (Kuipers et al., 1985). In addition, the heart rest oxygen consumption from exercise oxygen
rate was recorded continuously throughout the consumption. To estimate the total energy
tests (Polar Vantage NV, Electro Oy, Finland). The expenditure and oxygen consumption during
6–20 Borg scale (Borg, 1982) was used to measure each protocol, the energy expenditure were
the rating of perceived exertion during the test. summed and converted to kJ, assuming that 1 L of
High-intensity intermittent and moderate- oxygen consumed was equivalent to 20.9 kJ
intensity continuous exercise (Gastin, 2001).
For both exercise trials, the subjects Statistical Analysis
performed a warm-up consisting of running at Data normality was verified using the
50% of sVO2max for five minutes at a 1% Shapiro-Wilk test and descriptive data are
inclination. The HIIE was performed reported as means and standard deviation. The
intermittently with subjects running on a dependent t-test was used to compare the
treadmill for one minute at 100% of sVO2Peak differences between the two protocols and
(Little et al., 2011), interspersed with one minute Cohen’s d was the calculated effect size.
of passive recovery until they had completed 5 The differences during the tests were
km. The MICE consisted of continuous running of analyzed by repeated measures analyses and the
5 km on the treadmill at 70% of sVO2max. comparison between the MICE and HIIE was
Energy expenditure performed by two-way repeated measures
To estimate the energy expenditure of all ANOVA (group x time). When a significant
exercises, the sum of the contribution of the three difference in group or interaction was observed, a
energy systems (aerobic, anaerobic lactic and Tukey post hoc test was conducted. For all
alactic) was used. The aerobic metabolism was measured variables, the estimated sphericity was
estimated using the oxygen uptake integral verified according to the Mauchly’s W test, and
during the exercise, the anaerobic alactic was the Greenhouse-Geisser correction was used
assessed using the fast phase of excess of oxygen when necessary. The effect size (eta-squared; η2)
uptake as described by Beneke et al. (2002) and of each test was calculated for all analyses.
the lactic anaerobic contribution using net blood Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. The data
lactate accumulation as proposed by Di Prampero were analyzed using Biostat (version 5.0).
and Ferretti (1999).
Results
Oxygen uptake was measured
continuously and for 60 min after the exercise The characteristics and anthropometric
protocols. At the 1st, 3rd, 5th and 7th min after the measures of the subjects, in addition to a
end of each test, blood samples were collected by summary of the incremental test, are shown in

© Editorial Committee of Journal of Human Kinetics

130 Physiological acute response to high-intensity intermittent and moderate-intensity....

Table 1. p=002, η2= 0.41) with significant differences

A summary of both exercise protocols is between groups at the 30th min of exercise (p =
shown in Table 2. Significant differences were 0.044, η2 = 0.59).
found for HIIE compared to MICE (p = 0.01, When analyzing the HR and RPE (Figure
Cohen’s d = 1.07) for total speed and exercise 3), there were significant differences across time
session duration. (HR: p < 0.001, η2= 0.98; RPE: p = 0.001, η2 = 0.80),
Figure 1 presents the difference in [La-] between groups (HR: p = 0.038; η2 = 0.92; RPE: p =
between the MICE and HIIE. There was a 0.002; η2 = 0.66) and interaction (time x group, HR:
statistically significant difference across time as p = 0.003, η2 = 0.75; RPE: p < 0.001, η2 = 0.92).
well as 30, 45 and 60 minutes after the exercise Both aerobic and lactic anaerobic
session with higher values in the HIIE (p < 0.001, contributions were higher during HIIE than MICE
η2= 0.69). Furthermore, there was a statistically (p = 0.88), while alactic anaerobic contributions
significant difference between the MICE and HIIE were not different (Table 3). Furthermore, HIIE
groups (p = 0.001, η2= 0.66) and an interaction was presented higher total energy expenditure (p =
observed (time x group: p < 0.001, η2= 0.38). 0.003, Cohen’s d = 0.65) and EPOC (p = 0.03,
Figure 2 shows the differences in VO2 Cohen’s d = 0.58).
consumption during 30 minutes of exercise and HIIE presented higher values for the [La-]
30, 45 and 60 minutes after the exercise cessation area under the curve (293 ± 123.98 a.u.) than MICE
in both conditions. (120.44 ± 53.0 a.u.), however, when the rest period
There was a statistically significant of HIIE was controlled (Minganti et al., 2011),
difference across time in VO2 (p < 0.001, η2 = 0.98). there was no difference found between the
Post hoc analysis revealed that at the 10th and conditions (150.53 ± 62.73 a.u. and 120.44 ± 53.0
30th min of exercise, there was a difference in a.u., respectively; p = 0.13).
HIIE compared to at rest and the 5th min. All
groups presented a difference compared to rest.
After 30, 45 and 60 minutes of exercise cessation,
VO2 was different from all moments during
exercise for both groups and returned to baseline
values. There was an interaction (time x group:

Table 1
Subjects’ characteristics.

Variable Subjects (n = 12)

Age (years) 23.22 ± 5.47
Body Mass (kg) 74.60 ± 6.61
Body Height (m) 1.73 ± 0.06
BMI (kg/m2) 24.63 ± 1.97
VO2max (ml·kg·min-1) 58.58 ± 5.6

Values are mean ± standard deviation.

BMI= Body Mass Index;
VO2max = maximal oxygen uptake.

Journal of Human Kinetics - volume 56/2017 http://www.johk.pl

by Carolina Cabra-Santos et al. 131

Table 2
Summary of exercise descriptors for high-intensity exercise (HIIE)
and moderate-intensity continuous exercise (MICE) protocols (n=12).

MICE HIIE
Variable
Protocol run at 70% sVO2max 1:1-minute at 100% sVO2max

Speed (km·h-1) 10.14 ± 0.84 14.23 ± 1.20*

Exercise session (min) 29.77 ± 2.46 21.07 ± 1.78*

Total exercise duration (min) 29.77 ± 2.46 41.14 ± 3.56*

Values are mean ± standard deviation.

* = significant differences from MICE (p < 0.05).

Table 3
Mean ± standard deviation of aerobic, anaerobic lactic and alactic contribution,
total energy expenditure, and excess post oxygen consumption
during moderate intensity continuous exercise, and high intensity interval exercise (n = 12).
Variable MICE HIIE
Aerobic contribution
L 83.66 ± 11.28 96.59 ± 8.23*
kJ 1748.47 ± 235.73 2018.66 ± 172.04*
Anaerobic alactic contribution
L 1.68 ± 0.28 1.64 ± 0.50
kJ 35.11 ± 5.81 34.28 ± 10.35
Anaerobic lactic contribution
L 0.64 ± 0.67 1.27 ± 0.76*
kJ 13.33 ± 13.93 26.59 ± 15.78*
Total energy expenditure
L 88.35 ± 11.46 100.19 ± 8.15*
kJ 1846.60 ± 239.50 2094.06 ± 170.27*
EPOC
L 5.32 ± 2.39 6.61 ± 1.85*
kJ 111.19 ± 49.97 138.21 ± 38.69*

MICE: moderate intensity continuous exercise;

HIIE: high intensity interval exercise;
EPOC: excess post-exercise oxygen consumption.
* significantly different from MICE.

© Editorial Committee of Journal of Human Kinetics

132 Physiological acute response to high-intensity intermittent and moderate-intensity....

Figure 1
Difference on [La-] between MICE and HIIE.
Legend: a = Tukey’s post-hoc test with p < 0.05 compared to rest;
b = Tukey’s post-hoc test with p < 0.05 compared to immediately post-exercise;
c = Tukey’s post-hoc test with p < 0.05 compared to post 3 min;
d = Tukey’s post-hoc test with p < 0.05 compared to post 5 min;
e = Tukey’s post-hoc test with p < 0.05 compared to post 7 min;
*= statistically significant difference between MICE and HIIE.

Figure 2
Difference on oxygen uptake (VO2relative) between MICE and HIIE.
Legend: a = Tukey’s post-hoc test compared to rest;
b = Tukey’s post-hoc test compared to five minutes of exercise;
c = Tukey’s post-hoc test with compared to 10 min of exercise;
d = Tukey’s post-hoc test with compared to 15 min of exercise;
e = Tukey’s post-hoc test with compared to 20 min of exercise;
f = Tukey’s post-hoc test compared to 25 min of exercise;
g = Tukey’s post-hoc test compared to 30 min of exercise;
* = statistically significant difference between MICE and HIIE; p < 0.05

Journal of Human Kinetics - volume 56/2017 http://www.johk.pl

by Carolina Cabra-Santos et al. 133

Figure 3
Difference on the rating of perceived exertion (RPE) and heart rate
(HR) between MICE and HIIE.
Legend: For RPE: a = Tukey’s post-hoc test compared to five min of exercise;
b = Tukey’s post-hoc test compared to 10 min of exercise;
c = Tukey’s post-hoc test compared to 15 min of exercise;
d = Tukey’s post-hoc test compared to 20 min of exercise. For HR:
a = Tukey’s post-hoc test compared to rest;
b = Tukey’s post-hoc test compared to five min of exercise;
c = Tukey’s post-hoc test compared to 10 min of exercise;
d = Tukey’s post-hoc test compared to 15 min of exercise;
e = Tukey’s post-hoc test compared to 20 min of exercise;
f = Tukey’s post-hoc test compared to 25 min of exercise;
g = Tukey’s post-hoc test compared to 30 min of exercise;
* = statistically significant difference between MICE and HIIE; p < 0.05

Discussion mechanically braked bicycle ergometer, or if

performed outdoors, a field or running track), and
This study aimed to compare physiological may be unattainable for some populations,
response after an iso-volume HIIE and MICE in limiting its feasibility. Thus, high intensity
physically active subjects. In accordance with our interval training seems to be an interesting way to
hypothesis, the same volume HIIE induced a overcome this limitation (Skelly et al., 2014).
higher RPE, HR and post [La-] than MICE, As expected, the HR and a consequently
however, VO2 was higher only at the end of increasing RPE were higher during HIIE than
exercise. In addition, aerobic and lactic anaerobic MICE, since a linear relationship exists between
contributions, total energy expenditure and EPOC the HR and exercise intensity (Karvonen and
were higher during HIIE than MICE. Vuorimaa, 1988). In addition, [La-]peak was
High intensity interval training and all-out higher after the HIIE than the MICE, however,
maximum effort or capacity have been used to even the MICE presented mean [La-] values close
promote weight loss, glycemic control and to the anaerobic threshold immediately after the
increases in aerobic fitness (Burgomaster et al., exercise (4.74 ± 2.43 mmol·L-1), while the HIIE
2008; Gibala et al., 2012; Little et al., 2011; Panissa presented the values of 8.25 ± 2.95 mmol·L-1. This
et al., 2016). However, all-out exercise needs result indicates a higher contribution of the
specific equipment (cycloergometer, i.e.,

© Editorial Committee of Journal of Human Kinetics

134 Physiological acute response to high-intensity intermittent and moderate-intensity....

anaerobic metabolism during the HIIE in al., 2013). Thus, the assumption that training
comparison with the MICE. The present study consisting of HIIE is better than MICE to improve
revealed that even though the HR was higher physiological responses must be considered with
during HIIE, the VO2 response was not (Figure 2). caution since MICE intensity is
However, taking into account the aerobic usually too low to induce high adaptations. Other
contribution during the exercise, HIIE presented a studies may want to verify whether at or above
greater amount of consumed oxygen which may the anaerobic threshold moderate intensity
have occurred due to the longer exercise time training induces similar adaptations to high
(Table 2). Thus, since VO2 consumption intensity interval training.
(perceptual in relation to VO2max) during exercise The analysis of the recovery period has also
training is one important index to characterize the been proposed to be important regarding the
aerobic training stimulus (Buchheit and Laursen, effects of different types of training on physical
2013; Zagatto et al., 2011), the HIIE was more fitness (Skelly et al., 2014; Williams et al., 2013).
effective in stimulating the aerobic metabolism Skelly et al. (2014) did not observe any difference
compared with the MICE. Nevertheless, the in EPOC after HIIE and MICE in physically active
exercise time must be considered. When the HIIE subjects, however, MICE intensity was too low to
exercise time is matched for the MICE, the VO2 induce higher EPOC and HIIE presented low
integral of HIIE is significantly lower than MICE volume, hampering the comparison with the
(68.07 ± 6.19 L and 83.66 ± 11.28 L, respectively; p present study. Tucker et al. (2016) compared HIIE
= 0.0001), indicating that for isotime exercise, in (four bouts of 4 min intervals at 95% of the peak
continuous 5 km running at 70% of sVO2max the heart rate, with 3 min of active recovery), MICE
cumulative O2 cost is higher than in HIIE (with (30 min at 80% of HRpeak) and sprint interval
the same exercise session time); however, we exercise (SIE) (six 30 s Wingate sprints, separated
cannot assume whether after exercise, energy by 4 min of recovery periods) in active men and
expenditure (i.e. EPOC) would be different or not. although SIE elicited greater EPOC, no differences
Therefore, future studies should investigate were registered in total energy expenditure
whether it is more important to exercise at high compared to HIIE and MICE. This suggests that
intensity or to maintain a longer time of exercise this is unlikely to be the mechanism contributor to
at moderate intensity. body composition changes. In our study, EPOC
Several studies have compared the effects following HIIE was significantly higher compared
of high and moderate intensity training on to MICE, however, this difference was small and
physical fitness; however, various intensities have the result could have been similar if the exercise
been used to compare training exercises (Gillen et duration was the same. This is yet to be
al., 2013; Skelly et al., 2014; Trapp et al., 2008; determined.
Williams et al., 2013). In relation to moderate In addition to exercise volume (external
training, high intensity training has been load), and intensity (i.e., RPE, [La-], or HR;
proposed to present higher or similar physical (internal load)), their product (i.e., training
fitness adaptations (Buchheit and Laursen, 2013; impulse – TRIMP) must also be taken into account
Gibala et al., 2006; Wisløff et al., 2007), however, (Borresen and Lambert, 2008a; Borresen and
intensity used in the MICE may also influence the Lambert, 2008b; Foster et al., 2011; Manzi et al.,
results. Aiming to compare HIIE and MICE, 2009; Minganti et al., 2011). Although some
Skelly et al. (2014) used 77% and 33% of peak studies have equalized exercise energy
power output, respectively, which is considerably expenditure (Gibala et al., 2012), the training
lower than the intensity used in the present study impulse (product between the external and
(100% and 70% of sVO2max). While for our subjects, internal load) was not considered when
70% of sVO2max could have been at or slightly comparing exercise training. Thus, it is still
above the anaerobic threshold and the mean important to determine (i) whether physiological
exercise HR was 86.20 ± 2.76% of the maximal HR, differences exist between HIIE and MICE when
much higher than other moderate intensity the training impulse is equalized and (ii) whether
training protocols (Burgomaster et al., 2008; a passive resting period may have to be taken into
Gibala et al., 2012; Sperlich et al., 2011; Williams et account when calculating the training impulse.

Journal of Human Kinetics - volume 56/2017 http://www.johk.pl

by Carolina Cabra-Santos et al. 135

Recent research suggests that HIIE is a HIIE presented greater aerobic contribution
time-efficient exercise strategy (Gillen and Gibala, (Table 3), thus, total session duration may have
2014) when compared to MICE. These results are influenced our results(MICE: 29.77 ± 2.46 minutes;
in agreement with our findings, however, it HIIE: 41.14 ± 3.56 minutes). Furthermore, when
should be noted that longer exercise duration was the exercise time was relativized, no difference
required to accomplish the same distance of existed in the aerobic
running with HIIE compared to MICE. This is a contribution between HIIE and MICE. After
possible limitation when applying the results of exercise cessation, EPOC was higher in HIIE, but
this study to practice, as the effective training the differences were quantitatively small. Thus,
duration for HIIE was approximately 28% longer equalizing the training impulse or time of exercise
when including the recovery intervals. Moreover, could induce different results. The practical
the energy expenditure was 13% higher in HIIE application of these findings can be used to help
than MICE to complete the same distance. design physical training programs for all
In conclusion, HIIE was more effective at populations, due to the easily accessible benefits
modifying the HR and RPE. Oxygen uptake was from proper implementation.
higher only at the end of exercise, even though

Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP,
Brazil) under Grant nº 2013/25310-2.

References
Beneke R, Pollmann C, Bleif I, Leithäuser RM, Hütler M. How anaerobic is the Wingate Anaerobic Test for
humans? Eur J Appl Physiol, 2002; 87: 388–392
Bertuzzi RC, Franchini E, Kokubun E, Kiss MA. Energy system contributions in indoor rock climbing. Eur J
App Physiol, 2007; 101: 293-300
Borg Gunn AR. Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 1982; 14: 877
Borresen J, Lambert MI. Autonomic control of heart rate during and after exercise: measurements and
implications for monitoring training status. Sports Med, 2008; 38: 633-46
Borresen J, Lambert MI. Quantifying training load: a comparison of subjective and objective methods. Int J
Sports Physiol Perform, 2008; 3: 16
Buchheit M, Laursen PB. High-intensity interval training, solutions to the programming puzzle: Part I:
cardiopulmonary emphasis. Sports Med, 2013; 43: 313-38
Burgomaster KA, Howarth KR, Phillips SM, Rakobowchuk M, Macdonald MJ, McGee SL, Gibala MJ. Similar
metabolic adaptations during exercise after low volume sprint interval and traditional endurance
training in humans. J Physiol, 2008; 586: 151-160
di Prampero PE, Ferretti G. The energetics of anaerobic muscle metabolism: a reappraisal of older and recent
concepts. Respir Physiol, 1999; 118: 103-115
Foster C, Florhaug JA, Franklin J, Gottschall L, Hrovatin LA, Parker S, Doleshal P, Dodge C. A new approach
to monitoring exercise training. J Strength Cond Res, 2001; 15: 109-115
Garber CE, Blissmer B, Deschenes MR, Franklin BA, Lamonte MJ, Lee IM, Nieman DC, Swain DP. American
College of Sports Medicine position stand. Quantity and quality of exercise for developing and
maintaining cardiorespiratory, musculoskeletal, and neuromotor fitness in apparently healthy adults:
guidance for prescribing exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 2011; 43: 1334-1359
Gastin PB. Energy system interaction and relative contribution during maximal exercise. Sports Med, 2001;
31: 725-741

© Editorial Committee of Journal of Human Kinetics

136 Physiological acute response to high-intensity intermittent and moderate-intensity....

Gibala MJ, Little JP, Macdonald MJ, Hawley JA. Physiological adaptations to low-volume, high-intensity
interval training in health and disease. J Physiol, 2012; 590: 1077-1084
Gibala MJ, Little JP, van Essen M, Wilkin GP, Burgomaster KA, Safdar A, Raha S, Tarnopolsky MA. Short-
term sprint interval versus traditional endurance training: similar initial adaptations in human skeletal
muscle and exercise performance. J Physiol, 2006; 575: 901-911
Gillen JB, Percival ME, Ludzki A, Tarnopolsky MA, Gibala MJ. Interval training in the fed or fasted state
improves body composition and muscle oxidative capacity in overweight women. Obesity, 2013; 21:
2249-2255
Gillen JB, Gibala MJ. Is high-intensity interval training a time-efficient exercise strategy to improve health
and fitness? Appl Physiol Nutr Metab, 2014; 39: 409-412
Haskell WL, Lee IM, Pate RR, Powell KE, Blair SN, Franklin BA, Macera CA, Heath GW, Thompson PD,
Bauman A. Physical activity and public health: updated recommendation for adults from the
American College of Sports Medicine and the American Heart Association. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 2007;
39: 1423-1434
Ismail I, Keating SE, Baker MK, Johnson NA. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of aerobic
vs. resistance exercise training on visceral fat. Obes Rev, 2012; 13: 68-91
Karvonen J, Vuorimaa T. Heart rate and exercise intensity during sports activities. Practical application.
Sports Med, 1988; 5: 303-311
Kelley GA, Kelley KS. Effects of aerobic exercise on C-reactive protein, body composition, and maximum
oxygen consumption in adults: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Metabolism, 2006; 55:
1500-507
Kelley GA, Kelley KS. Efficacy of aerobic exercise on coronary heart disease risk factors. Prev Cardiol, 2008;
11: 71-75
Kuipers H, Verstappen FT, Keizer HA, Geurten P, van Kranenburg G. Variability of Aerobic Performance in
the Laboratory and Its Physiologic Correlates. Int J Sports Med, 1985; 6: 197-201
Little JP, Gillen JB, Percival ME, Safdar A, Tarnopolsky MA, Punthakee Z, Jung ME, Gibala MJ. Low-volume
high-intensity interval training reduces hyperglycemia and increases muscle mitochondrial capacity
in patients with type 2 diabetes. J Appl Physiol, 2011; 111: 1554-1560
Manzi V, Iellamo F, Impellizzeri F, D’Ottavio S, Castagna C. Relation between individualized training
impulses and performance in distance runners. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 2009; 41: 2090-2096
Minganti C, Ferragina A, Demarie S, Verticchio N, Meeusen R, Piacentini MF. The use of session RPE for
interval training in master endurance athletes: should rest be included? J Sports Med Phys Fitness, 2011;
51: 547-554
Nelson ME, Rejeski WJ, Blair SN, Duncan PW, Judge JO, King AC, Macera CA, Castaneda-Sceppa C.
Physical activity and public health in older adults: recommendation from the American College of
Sports Medicine and the American Heart Association. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 2007; 39: 1435-1445
Ozyener F, Rossiter HB, Ward SA, Whipp BJ. Influence of exercise intensity on the on- and off-transient
kinetics of pulmonary oxygen uptake in humans. J Physiol, 2001; 533: 891-902
Panissa VLG, Alves ED, Salermo GP, Franchini E, Takito MY. Can short-term high-intensity intermittent
training reduce adiposity? Sport Sci Health, 2016; 12: 99-104
Skelly LE, Andrews PC, Gillen JB, Martin BJ, Percival ME, Gibala MJ. High-intensity interval exercise
induces 24-h energy expenditure similar to traditional endurance exercise despite reduced time
commitment. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab, 2014; 39: 845-848
Sperlich B, De Marées M, Koehler K, Linville J, Holmberg HC, Mester J. Effects of 5 weeks of high-intensity
interval training vs. volume training in 14-year-old soccer players. J Strength Cond Res, 2011; 25: 1271-
1278
Thorogood A, Mottillo S, Shimony A, Filion KB, Joseph L, Genest J, Pilote L, Poirier P, Schiffrin EL,

Journal of Human Kinetics - volume 56/2017 http://www.johk.pl

by Carolina Cabra-Santos et al. 137

Eisenberg MJ. Isolated aerobic exercise and weight loss: a systematic review and meta-analysis of
randomized controlled trials. Am J Med, 2011; 124: 747–755
Tucker WJ, Angadi SS, Gaesser GA. Excess Postexercise Oxygen Consumption After High-Intensity and
Sprint Interval Exercise, and Continuous Steady-State Exercise. J Strength Cond Res, 2016; 30: 3090-3097
Trapp EG, Chisholm DJ, Freund J, Boutcher SH. The effects of high-intensity intermittent exercise training on
fat loss and fasting insulin levels of young women. Int J Obes, 2008; 32: 684-691
Whyte LJ, Gill JM, Cathcart AJ. Effect of 2 weeks of sprint interval training on health-related outcomes in
sedentary overweight/obese men. Metabolism, 2010; 59: 1421-1428
Williams CB, Zelt JG, Castellani LN, Little JP, Jung ME, Wright DC, Tschakovsky ME, Gurd BJ. Changes in
mechanisms proposed to mediate fat loss following an acute bout of high-intensity interval and
endurance exercise. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab, 2013; 38: 1236-44
Wisløff U, Støylen A, Loennechen JP, Bruvold M, Rognmo Ø, Haram PM, Tjønna AE, Helgerud J, Slørdahl
SA, Lee SJ, Videm V, Bye A, Smith GL, Najjar SM, Ellingsen Ø, Skjaerpe T. Superior cardiovascular
effect of aerobic interval training versus moderate continuous training in heart failure patients: a
randomized study. Circulation, 2007; 115: 3086-3094
Zagatto A, Redkva P, Loures J, Kalva Filho C, Franco V, Kaminagakura E, Papoti M. Anaerobic contribution
during maximal anaerobic running test: correlation with maximal accumulated oxygen deficit.
Scandinavian J Med & Sci Sports, 2011; 21: 222-2230

Corresponding author:

Eduardo Zapaterra Campos

Department of Physical Education – Universidade Federal de Pernambuco
Avenida Professor Moraes Rego, 1235, CEP 5670-901, Recife, PE, Brazil.
Phone: 55 81 21268000
E-mail address: zacampos@yahoo.com.br

© Editorial Committee of Journal of Human Kinetics