BACKGROUND Two forms of interval training commonly discussed in the literature are high-intensity interval training (HIIT) and sprint interval training (SIT). HIIT consists of repeated bouts of exercise that occur at a power output or velocity between the second ventilatory threshold and maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max). SIT is performed at a power output or velocity above those associated with VO2max. OBJECTIVE The primary objective of this study is to systematically review published randomized and pair-matched trials to determine which mode of interval training, HIIT versus SIT, leads to a greater improvement in TT performance in active and trained individuals. The second objective of this review is to perform a subgroup analysis to determine if there is a distinction between HIIT programs that differ in work-bout duration. DATA SOURCES SPORTDiscus (1800-present) and Medline with Full Text (1946-present) were used to conduct a systematic literature search. STUDY SELECTION Studies were selected for the review if they met the following criteria: (1) individuals (males and females) who were considered at least moderately trained (~ 3-h per week of activity) as specified by the authors of the included studies; (2) between the ages of 18 and 45 years; (3) randomized or pair-matched trials that included a HIIT and a SIT group; (4) provided detailed information about the interval training program; (5) were at least 2 weeks in duration; (6) included a TT test that required participants to complete a set distance. RESULTS A total of 6 articles met the inclusion criteria for the subjective and objective analysis. The pooled analysis was based on a random-effects model. There was no difference in the change in TT performance when comparing all HIIT versus SIT (0.9%; 90% CI - 1.2-1.9%, p = 0.18). However, subgroup analysis based on duration of work interval indicated a 2% greater improvement in TT performance following long-HIIT (≥ 4 min) when compared to SIT. There was no difference in change in VO2max/peak oxygen consumption (VO2peak) between groups. There was a moderate effect (ES = 0.70) in favor of HIIT over SIT in maximal aerobic power (MAP) or maximal aerobic velocity (MAV). CONCLUSION The results of the meta-analysis indicate that long-HIIT may be the optimal form of interval training to augment TT performance. Additional research that directly compares HIIT exercise differing in work-bout duration would strengthen these results and provide further insight into the mechanisms behind the observed benefits of long-HIIT.

中文翻译：

---

高强度间歇训练与短跑间歇训练对计时赛成绩的影响：系统评价和荟萃分析。

背景技术文献中通常讨论的两种形式的间歇训练是高强度间歇训练（HIIT）和短跑间歇训练（SIT）。HIIT由重复的运动组成，这些运动以第二通气阈值和最大耗氧量（VO2max）之间的功率输出或速度发生。SIT以高于与VO2max相关的功率输出或速度执行。目的这项研究的主要目的是系统地审查已发表的随机和配对研究，以确定哪种间歇训练模式，HIIT与SIT，可以使活跃和训练有素的个体的TT性能得到更大的改善。这项审查的第二个目标是进行小组分析，以确定在工休时间不同的HIIT程序之间是否存在区别。数据源体育研究使用Discus（目前的1800年）和Medline with Full Text（目前的1946年）来进行系统的文献搜索。研究选择如果研究符合以下标准，则选择研究进行审查：（1）个体（男性和女性）被认为包括研究作者指定的经过中等程度的训练（每周活动约3小时） ; （2）18至45岁之间；（3）包括HIIT和SIT组的随机或配对研究；（4）提供了有关间隔训练计划的详细信息；（5）至少持续2周；（6）包括一项TT测试，要求参与者完成设定的距离。结果共有6篇文章符合主观和客观分析的纳入标准。汇总分析基于随机效应模型。比较所有HIIT与SIT时，TT性能的变化没有差异（0.9％； 90％CI-1.2-1.9％，p = 0.18）。但是，基于工作间隔时间的亚组分析表明，与SIT相比，长时间HIIT（≥4分钟）后，TT性能提高了2％。两组之间最大摄氧量/峰值耗氧量（VO2peak）的变化无差异。在最大有氧运动能力（MAP）或最大有氧运动速度（MAV）方面，HIIT优于SIT有中等效果（ES = 0.70）。结论荟萃分析的结果表明，长时间的HIIT可能是间歇训练以增强TT性能的最佳形式。