A 4-Week Intervention Involving Mobile-Based Daily 6-Minute Micro-Sessions of Functional High-Intensity Circuit Training Improves Strength and Quality of Life, but Not Cardio-Respiratory Fitness of Young Untrained Adults
Billy Sperlich, Lea-Sofie Hahn, Antonia Edel, Tino Behr, Julian Helmprobst, Robert Leppich, Birgit Wallmann-Sperlich, Hans-Christer Holmberg
Abstract
The present study was designed to assess the psycho-physiological responses of physically untrained individuals to mobile-based multi-stimulating, circuit-like, multiple-joint conditioning (CircuitHIIT) performed either once (1xCircuitHIIT) or twice (2xCircuitHIIT) daily for 4 weeks. In this single-center, two-arm randomized, controlled study, 24 men and women (age: 25 ± 5 years) first received no training instructions for 4 weeks and then performed 4 weeks of either 1xCircuitHIIT or 2xCircuitHIIT (5 men and 7 women in each group) daily. The 1xCircuitHIIT and 2xCircuitHIIT participants carried out 90.7 and 85.7% of all planned training sessions, respectively, with average heart rates during the 6-min sessions of 74.3 and 70.8% of maximal heart rate. Body, fat and fat-free mass, and metabolic rate at rest did not differ between the groups or between time-points of measurement. Heart rate while running at 6 km⋅h-1 declined after the intervention in both groups. Submaximal and peak oxygen uptake, the respiratory exchange ratio and heart rate recovery were not altered by either intervention. The maximal numbers of push-ups, leg-levers, burpees, 45°-one-legged squats and 30-s skipping, as well as perception of general health improved in both groups. Our 1xCircuitHIIT or 2xCircuitHIIT interventions improved certain parameters of functional strength and certain dimensions of quality of life in young untrained individuals. However, they were not sufficient to enhance cardio-respiratory fitness, in particular peak oxygen uptake.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 41. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 January 2024.
All research outputs
#1,031,149
of 25,769,258 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#572
of 15,716 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,272
of 343,155 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#35
of 475 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,769,258 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,716 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 343,155 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 475 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
