Efeitos de dois tipos de recuperação ativa na realização de esforços intervalados de alta intensidade : estudo com pessoas de diversos tipos de aptidão aeróbica

Abstract

Introduction: In the prescription of high intensity interval training (HIIT) the recovery time between efforts is relevant aspect. However, the type of recovery has been shown to be a determinant of subsequent performance, and most studies have indicated that active recovery (RA) tends to be superior to passive (PR) recovery. Specifically regarding RA, it can be with the same muscle group exercised, with opposite body segment or with trunk region. At the However, the latter strategy has been little investigated. Objective: To investigate the effects of two types of RA on physiological responses and physical performance subsequent to high intensity interval training, considering two different levels of aerobic fitness. Materials and methods: The study was developed with 25 men, aged between 18 and 35 years, who were allocated in one of two groups: High Aptitude (AACR), Low Aptitude (BACR). Those involved had three days of activities. At the first visit, body mass, height, skinfolds, heart rate, blood lactate and resting blood pressure were measured, Of maximum power test (Pmax) on cycle ergometer and time-out test (TLim to 120% of Pmax), fifteen minutes after. The classification in AACR or BACR was from the Pmax obtained in the progressive test in cycle ergometer, and allocation according to the median. In the two and three views the subjects performed: i) standardized heating, ii) HIIT with two blocks with four supramaximal stimuli each (30 s at 60 rpm and with 120% load of Pmax, 30 s of passive recovery) and iii) TLim after Or HIIT. After heating, between the HIIT blocks and before the TLim, participants performed one of two modes of active recovery: active bike recovery and active recovery with core stabilization exercises. In the bike recovery, 30% of the Pmax was cycled for 3 min and in the core, three exercises were performed, each lasting 50 s. To analyze the data, we counted With descriptive statistics and data were analyzed with two-way analysis of variance (aerobic fitness level and recovery type) with repeated measurements. We assumed p <0.05 as a level of significance. Results: There was no statistically significant difference considering the level of fitness and type of recovery for TLim. For core recovery, BACR and AACR reached, respectively, 118 ± 25 s and 142 ± 62 s. In bike recovery, the values ​​were 110 ± 24 s and 134 ± 72 s. The bike recovery provided lower values ​​of blood lactate, but only before the second series of efforts (BACR: 3.62 ± 0.76mmol for core and 2.99 ± 0.90mmol for bike; AACR: 3.23 ± 0.52mmol for core and 2.83 ± 0.66mmol for bike, F = 6.38 , P = 0.01). A9 core recovery, in turn, decreases heart rate more pronouncedly before the first and second series of HIIT, as well as before TLim (F≥33.8, p <0.001). Conclusion: Considering two types of active recovery and two levels of aerobic physical fitness, no significant differences were observed in the time limit after high intensity interval exercise. Recovery with bicycle showed greater lactate removal after the second effort series and recovery with core exercises showed a greater contribution in decreasing heart rate during the recovery periods between the two blocks of effort.