Logotipo do repositório
 

Publicação:
Physiological Responses During High-Intensity Interval Training in Young Swimmers

dc.contributor.authorAlmeida, Tiago André Freire [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorPessôa Filho, Dalton Müller [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorEspada, Mário Cunha
dc.contributor.authorReis, Joana Filipa
dc.contributor.authorSancassani, Andrei [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorMassini, Danilo Alexandre [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorSantos, Fernando Jorge
dc.contributor.authorAlves, Francisco Besone
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade de Lisboa
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
dc.contributor.institutionPolytechnic Institute of Setúbal
dc.contributor.institutionQuality of Life Research Center
dc.date.accessioned2022-04-28T19:41:39Z
dc.date.available2022-04-28T19:41:39Z
dc.date.issued2021-07-01
dc.description.abstractThis study analyzed whether 100- and 200-m interval training (IT) in swimming differed regarding temporal, perceptual, and physiological responses. The IT was performed at maximal aerobic velocity (MAV) until exhaustion and time spent near to maximalVO2 peak oxygen uptake (⩒O2peak), total time limit (tLim), peak blood lactate [La−] peak, ⩒O2 kinetics (⩒O2K), and rate of perceived exertion (RPE) were compared between protocols. Twelve swimmers (seven males 16.1 ± 1.1 and five females 14.2 ± 1 years) completed a discontinuous incremental step test for the second ventilatory threshold (VT2), ⩒O2peak, and MAV assessment. The swimmers subsequently completed two IT protocols at MAV with 100- and 200-m bouts to determine the maximal ⩒O2 (peak-⩒O2) and time spent ≥VT2, 90, and 95% of ⩒O2peak for the entire protocols (IT100 and IT200) and during the first 800-m of each protocol (IT8x100 and IT4x200). A portable apparatus (K4b2) sampled gas exchange through a snorkel and an underwater led signal controlled the velocity. RPE was also recorded. The Peak-⩒O2 attained during IT8x100 and IT4x200 (57.3 ± 4.9 vs. 57.2 ± 4.6 ml·kg−1·min−1) were not different between protocols (p = 0.98) nor to ⩒O2peak (59.2 ± 4.2 ml·kg−1·min−1, p = 0.37). The time constant of ⩒O2K (24.9 ± 8.4 vs. 25.1 ± 6.3-s, p = 0.67) and [La−] peak (7.9 ± 3.4 and 8.7 ± 1.5 mmol·L−1, p = 0.15) also did not differ between IT100 and IT200. The time spent ≥VT2, 90, and 95%⩒O2peak were also not different between IT8x100 and IT4x200 (p = 0.93, 0.63, and 1.00, respectively). The RPE for IT8x100 was lower than that for IT4x200 (7.62 ± 2 vs. 9.5 ± 0.7, p = 0.01). Both protocols are considered suitable for aerobic power enhancement, since ⩒O2peak was attained with similar ⩒O2K and sustained with no differences in tLim. However, the fact that only the RPE differed between the IT protocols suggested that coaches should consider that nx100-m/15-s is perceived as less difficult to perform compared with nx200-m/30-s for the first 800-m when managing the best strategy to be implemented for aerobic power training.en
dc.description.affiliationInterdisciplinary Center for the Study of Human Performance (CIPER) Faculdade de Motricidade Humana Universidade de Lisboa
dc.description.affiliationFaculdade de Motricidade Humana Universidade de Lisboa
dc.description.affiliationDepartment of Physical Education São Paulo State University (UNESP)
dc.description.affiliationInstitute of Bioscience Graduate Program in Human Development and Technology São Paulo State University (UNESP)
dc.description.affiliationDepartment of Science and Technology Polytechnic Institute of Setúbal
dc.description.affiliationQuality of Life Research Center
dc.description.affiliationUnespDepartment of Physical Education São Paulo State University (UNESP)
dc.description.affiliationUnespInstitute of Bioscience Graduate Program in Human Development and Technology São Paulo State University (UNESP)
dc.description.sponsorshipFundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
dc.description.sponsorshipFoundation for Science and Technology
dc.description.sponsorshipIdFundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia: UIDB/04748/2020
dc.description.sponsorshipIdFoundation for Science and Technology: UIDB/04748/2020
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2021.662029
dc.identifier.citationFrontiers in Physiology, v. 12.
dc.identifier.doi10.3389/fphys.2021.662029
dc.identifier.issn1664-042X
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85110530010
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/221983
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofFrontiers in Physiology
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectinterval training
dc.subjectoxygen uptake kinetics
dc.subjectperformance
dc.subjectswimming
dc.subjectwork-interval
dc.titlePhysiological Responses During High-Intensity Interval Training in Young Swimmersen
dc.typeArtigo
dspace.entity.typePublication

Arquivos

Coleções