Repeatability of the Individual Response to the Use of Active Recovery the Day After High-Intensity Interval Training: A Double-Crossover Trial

Click name to view affiliation

Thimo Wiewelhove
Search for other papers by Thimo Wiewelhove in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
Constantin Thase
Search for other papers by Constantin Thase in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
Marcel Glahn
Search for other papers by Marcel Glahn in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
Anthony Hessel
Search for other papers by Anthony Hessel in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
Christoph Schneider
Search for other papers by Christoph Schneider in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
Laura Hottenrott
Search for other papers by Laura Hottenrott in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
Tim Meyer
Search for other papers by Tim Meyer in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
Michael Kellmann
Search for other papers by Michael Kellmann in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
Mark Pfeiffer
Search for other papers by Mark Pfeiffer in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
, and
Alexander Ferrauti
Search for other papers by Alexander Ferrauti in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2020-0671
Keywords:
recovery interventions; repeated-period crossover; muscle fatigue; muscle soreness
First Published Online:
19 Feb 2021
In Print:
Volume 16: Issue 8
Page Range:
1160–1168
Restricted access

Purpose: To identify whether the use of active recovery (ACT) the day after high-intensity interval training (HIIT) benefits recovery and to assess whether individual responses to ACT are repeatable. Methods: Eleven well-trained, male intermittent-sport athletes (age: 25.5 ± 1.8 y) completed 4 HIIT sessions, each separated by a 2-week washout period. Of the 4 sessions, 2 were followed by passive recovery (PAS) and 2 by 60 minutes of moderate biking (ACT) 24 hours postexercise in the following sequences: ACT→PAS→ACT→PAS or PAS→ACT→PAS→ACT. Before and after HIIT and after 24 and 48 hours of recovery, maximal voluntary isometric strength (MVIC), countermovement jump height (CMJ), tensiomyographic markers of muscle fatigue (TMG), serum concentration of creatine kinase (CK), muscle soreness (MS), and perceived stress state (PS) were determined. Results: A 3-way repeated-measure analysis of variance with a triple-nested random effects model revealed a significant (P < .05) fatigue-related time effect of HIIT on markers of fatigue (MVIC↓; CMJ↓; TMG↑; CK↑; MS↑; PS↑). No significant (P > .05) main effect of recovery strategy was detected. In 9 subjects, the individual results revealed inconsistent and nonrepeatable responses to ACT, while a consistent and repeatable positive or negative response to ACT was found in 2 individuals. Conclusions: The repeated failure of ACT to limit the severity of fatigue was found both at the group level and with most individuals. However, a small percentage of athletes may be more likely to benefit repeatedly from either ACT or PAS. Therefore, the use of ACT should be individualized.

Wiewelhove, Thase, Glahn, Schneider, Hottenrott, Kellmann, and Ferrauti are with the Faculty of Sport Science, Ruhr University, Bochum, Germany. Hessel is with the Inst of Physiology II, University of Münster, Germany. Meyer is with the Inst of Sports and Preventive Medicine, Saarland University, Saarbrücken, Germany. Kellmann is also with the School of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia. Pfeiffer is with the Inst of Sports Science, Johannes-Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany.

Wiewelhove (thimo.wiewelhove@rub.de) is corresponding author.
  • Collapse
  • Expand
Cover International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance
  • 1.

    Andersson H, Raastad T, Nilsson J, Paulsen G, Garthe I, Kadi F. Neuromuscular fatigue and recovery in elite female soccer: effects of active recovery. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008;40(2):372–380. PubMed ID: 18202563 doi:10.1249/mss.0b013e31815b8497

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2.

    Van Hooren B, Peake JM. Do we need a cool-down after exercise? A narrative review of the psychophysiological effects and the effects on performance, injuries and the long-term adaptive response. Sport Med. 2018;48(7):1575–1595. doi:10.1007/s40279-018-0916-2

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    Wiewelhove T, Schneider C, Schmidt A, et al. Active recovery after high-intensity interval-training does not attenuate training adaptation. Front Physiol. 2018;9:415. PubMed ID: 29720949 doi:10.3389/fphys.2018.00415

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Le Meur Y, Hausswirth C. Active recovery. In: Hausswirth C, Mujika I, ed. Recovery for Performance in Sport. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2013:29–42.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5.

    Wiewelhove T, Raeder C, Meyer T, Kellmann M, Pfeiffer M, Ferrauti A. Effect of repeated active recovery during a high-intensity interval-training shock microcycle on markers of fatigue. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2016;11(8):1060–1066. PubMed ID: 26999645 doi:10.1123/ijspp.2015-0494

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6.

    Raeder C, Wiewelhove T, Schneider C, et al. Effects of active recovery on muscle function following high-intensity training sessions in elite olympic weightlifters. Adv Skelet Muscle Funct Assess. 2017;1:3–12.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    Wiewelhove T, Fernandez-Fernandez J, Raeder C, et al. Acute responses and muscle damage in different high-intensity interval running protocols. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2016;56:606–615. PubMed ID: 27285349

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Raeder C, Wiewelhove T, Westphal-Martinez MP, et al. Neuromuscular fatigue and physiological responses after five dynamic squat exercise protocols. J Strength Cond Res. 2016;30(4):953–965. PubMed ID: 26349042 doi:10.1519/JSC.0000000000001181

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Hecksteden A, Pitsch W, Rosenberger F, Meyer T. Repeated testing for the assessment of individual response to exercise training. J Appl Physiol. 2018;124(6):1567–1579. PubMed ID: 29357481 doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.00896.2017

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Hecksteden A, Kraushaar J, Scharhag-Rosenberger F, Theisen D, Senn S, Meyer T. Individual response to exercise training—a statistical perspective. J Appl Physiol. 2015;118(12):1450–1459. PubMed ID: 25663672 doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.00714.2014

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Thomas S, Reading J, Shephard RJ. Revision of the physical activity readiness questionnaire (PAR-Q). Can J Sport Sci. 1992;17:338–45. PubMed ID: 1330274

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Raeder C, Wiewelhove T, De Paula Simola RÁ, et al. Assessment of fatigue and recovery in male and female athletes after 6 days of intensified strength training. J Strength Cond Res. 2016;30(12):3412–3427. PubMed ID: 27093538 doi:10.1519/JSC.0000000000001427

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13.

    Wiewelhove T, Raeder C, Meyer T, Kellmann M, Pfeiffer M, Ferrauti A. Markers for routine assessment of fatigue and recovery in male and female team sport athletes during high-intensity interval training. PLoS One. 2015;10(10):e0139801. PubMed ID: 26444557 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0139801

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14.

    de Paula Simola RÁ, Raeder C, Wiewelhove T, et al. Muscle mechanical properties of strength and endurance athletes and changes after one week of intensive training. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2016;30:73–80. doi:10.1016/j.jelekin.2016.05.005

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    Hecksteden A, Skorski S, Schwindling S, et al. Blood-borne markers of fatigue in competitive athletes—results from simulated training camps. PLoS One. 2016;11(2):e0148810. PubMed ID: 26891051 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0148810

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16.

    Kellmann M, Kölling S. Recovery and Stress in Sport: A Manual for Testing and Assessment. New York: Routledge; 2019.

  • 17.

    Borg G. Borg's Perceived Exertion and Pain Scales. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 1998.

  • 18.

    Seiler S, Haugen O, Kuffel E. Autonomic recovery after exercise in trained athletes: intensity and duration effects. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2007;39(8):1366–1373. PubMed ID: 17762370 doi:10.1249/mss.0b013e318060f17d

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Mader AH, Liesen H, Heck H, et al. Zur Beurteilung der sportartspezifischen Ausdauerleistungsfähigkeit im Labor. Sport Sport. 1976;4:80–88.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20.

    Heck H, Mader A, Hess G, Mücke S, Müller R, Hollmann W. Justification of the 4-mmol/l lactate threshold. Int J Sports Med. 1985;6(03):117–130. PubMed ID: 4030186 doi:10.1055/s-2008-1025824

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21.

    Wiewelhove T, Schneider C, Döweling A, et al. Effects of different recovery strategies following a half-marathon on fatigue markers in recreational runners. PLoS One. 2018;13(11):e0207313. PubMed ID: 30412626 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0207313

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22.

    Hawker GA, Mian S, Kendzerska T, French M. Measures of adult pain: Visual Analog Scale for Pain (VAS Pain), Numeric Rating Scale for Pain (NRS Pain), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), Chronic Pain Grade Scale (CPGS), Short Form-36 Bodily Pain Scale (SF-36 BPS), and Measure of Intermittent and Constant Osteoarthritis Pain (ICOAP). Arthritis Care Res. 2011;63:S240–S252. doi:10.1002/acr.20543

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23.

    Buchheit M. Monitoring cardiorespiratory fitness in professional soccer players: is it worth the prick? https://martin-buchheit.net/2020/02/02/monitoring-cardiorespiratory-fitness-in-professional-soccer-players-is-it-worth-the-prick/. Accessed April 9, 2020.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24.

    Rhea MR. Determining the magnitude of treatment effects in strength training research through the use of the effect size. J Strength Cond Res. 2004;18:918–920. PubMed ID: 15574101

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 25.

    Turner A, Brazier J, Bishop C, Chavda S, Cree J, Read P. Data analysis for strength and conditioning coaches: using excel to analyze reliability, differences, and relationships. Strength Cond J. 2015;37(1):76–83. doi:10.1519/SSC.0000000000000113

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26.

    Sherman WM, Armstrong LE, Murray TM, et al. Effect of a 42.2-km footrace and subsequent rest or exercise on muscular strength and work capacity. J Appl Physiol Respir Environ Exerc Physiol. 1984;57:1668–1673. PubMed ID: 6511541

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27.

    Andersson H, Karlsen A, Blomhoff R, Raastad T, Kadi F. Active recovery training does not affect the antioxidant response to soccer games in elite female players. Br J Nutr. 2010;104(10):1492–1499. PubMed ID: 20609267 doi:10.1017/S0007114510002394

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 28.

    Andersson H, Bøhn SK, Raastad T, Paulsen G, Blomhoff R, Kadi F. Differences in the inflammatory plasma cytokine response following two elite female soccer games separated by a 72-h recovery. Scand J Med Sci Sport. 2010;20(5):740–747. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0838.2009.00989.x

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 29.

    Pickering C, Kiely J. Understanding personalized training responses: can genetic assessment help? Open Sports Sci J. 2017;10(1):191–213. doi:10.2174/1875399X01710010191

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 30.

    Mann TN, Lamberts RP, Lambert MI. High responders and low responders: factors associated with individual variation in response to standardized training. Sport Med. 2014;44(8):1113–1124. doi:10.1007/s40279-014-0197-3

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 3224 784 166
Full Text Views 113 34 1
PDF Downloads 111 11 2