Skip to main content
Log in

Physiological profile comparison between high intensity functional training, endurance and power athletes

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Applied Physiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

High intensity functional trainings (HIFT), a recent development of high intensity trainings, includes in the same training session components of endurance exercises, elements of Olympic weightlifting and powerlifting, gymnastics, plyometrics and calisthenics exercises. Therefore, subjects practicing this type of activity are supposed to show physiological features that represent a combination of both endurance and power athletes. The aim of this study was to compare the physiological profile of three groups of age-matched endurance, HIFT and power athletes.

Methods

A total of 30 participants, 18 to 38-year-old men were enrolled in the study. Participants were divided in three groups: HIFT (n = 10), endurance (END, n = 10), and power (POW, weightlifters, n = 10) athletes. All were evaluated for anthropometric characteristics, VO2peak, handgrip, lower limb maximal isometric and isokinetic strength, countermovement vertical jump and anaerobic power through a shuttle run test on the field.

Results

VO2peak/kg was higher in END and HIFT than POW athletes (p = 0.001 and p = 0.007, respectively), but there were no significant differences between the first two. POW and HIFT athletes showed significant greater strength at the handgrip, countermovement jump and leg extension/flexion tests than END athletes. HIFT athletes showed highest results at the dynamic isokinetic test, while there were no significant differences at the shuttle run test among groups.

Conclusions

As HIFT reach aerobic levels similar to END athletes and power and strength output similar to POW athletes, it appears that HIFT programs are effective to improve both endurance-related and power-related physical fitness components.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Download references

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

Authorship: PEA, and AM contributed to the conception or design of the work. PEA, JER, NM, GDV, MB and AM contributed to the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work. PEA and AM drafted the manuscript. PEA, JER, NM, GDV, MB and AM critically revised the manuscript. All gave final approval and agree to be accountable for all aspects of work ensuring integrity and accuracy.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. E. Adami.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Additional information

Communicated by Olivier Seynnes.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Adami, P.E., Rocchi, J.E., Melke, N. et al. Physiological profile comparison between high intensity functional training, endurance and power athletes. Eur J Appl Physiol 122, 531–539 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-021-04858-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-021-04858-3

Keywords

Navigation