High Intensity Functional Training Improves Multiple ...

Slide Presentation at the 2018 American College of Sports Medicine Annual Meeting, Minneapolis, MN Title: High Intensity Functional Training Improves Multiple Domains of Fitness in Females and Males Authors: Katie M. Heinrich, PhD, Sarah J Cosgrove, PhD, Jacob Frye, MS Sponsor: Yuri Feito, PhD, FACSM It is unclear if high intensity functional training (HIFT), that temporally combines aerobic, gymnastics, and weightlifting exercises for general physical preparedness (GPP), improves multiple fitness domains. PURPOSE: To examine effects of 6-months of HIFT on nine fitness domains. METHODS: Program evaluation participants (N = 48, 50% female, age = 31.8 ± 13.3 years, range = 18-66 years, 87.5% white) were new/existing members of a university HIFT gym at enrollment (HIFT experience = 9.8 ± 8.4 months, range = 0-27 months), and reported usually doing HIFT workouts 4.0 ± 1.1 days/week. At baseline and 6-months, field fitness tests measured coordination and balance (agility hop), agility (pro-agility), flexibility (sit-and-reach), power (standing long jump and seated medicine ball put), and muscular endurance/stamina (60-seconds of push-ups/knee push-ups, sit-ups, air squats, and max repetitions of strict/banded pull-ups) on day 1; strength (1RM back squat, press, and deadlift) on day 2; and speed (400m run), and cardiorespiratory endurance (1.5 mile run) on day 3. Participants completed the same standardized warm-up before each measurement day. Paired/independent samples t-tests were conducted using SPSS 24. RESULTS: Females significantly improved flexibility (31.1 ± 9.2 cm to 34.1 ± 8.1 cm, t = 3.8, p = .001), power (long jump = 1.75 ± 0.33 m to 1.81 ± 0.31 m, t = 3.0, p = .006), muscular endurance (push-ups [n=13] = 25.2 ± 7.0 to 29.8 ± 7.8 reps, t = 2.4, p = .035), and strength (back squat = 58.2 ± 12.4 kg to 64.3 ± 13.9 kg, t = 4.6, p < .001; press = 32.3 ± 5.9 kg to 34.7 ± 7.4 kg, t = 3.7, p = .002; and deadlift = 80.0 ± 18.9 kg to 87.7 ± 22.0 kg, t = 3.2, p = .005). Males significantly improved flexibility (29.5 ± 8.6 cm to 31.6 ± 7.4 cm, t = 2.1, p = .043), muscular endurance (pull-ups [n=16] = 3.6 ± 0.9 to 4.2 ± 1.0 reps, t = 2.7, p = .018) and strength (back squat = 101.8 ± 27.0 kg to 110.6 ± 30.0 kg, t = 5.0, p < .001; deadlift = 130.4 ± 31.6 kg to 139.5 ± 31.2 kg, t = 4.2, p < .001). Females improved significantly more than males only for power (long jump, t = 3.1, p = .004). CONCLUSIONS: The GPP-focused HIFT training significantly improved multiple fitness domains for females and males after 6 months of training, with no significant fitness decreases. Improvements were found even among experienced HIFT participants, which may help facilitate continued participation.

High Intensity Functional Training Improves Multiple Domains of Fitness in Females and Males Katie M. Heinrich, PhD, Sarah J. Cosgrove, PhD, & Jacob Frye, MS Sponsor: Yuri Feito, PhD, FACSM

Functional Intensity Training Laboratory (FIT Lab), Department of Kinesiology, College of Human Ecology http://bit.ly/fitlab

Funding: Provost’s Academic Excellence Fund

Background High-Intensity Functional Training (HIFT) • Group-exercise program • Temporally combines aerobic, body weight, and weight lifting exercises in constantly-varied time domains and patterns • Focus on functional movements • Shorter-duration than moderate exercise (Heinrich et al., 2014; Heinrich et al., 2015; Kliszczewicz et al., 2018)

HIFT and High Intensity Interval Training (HIIT)

• Both are high-intensity exercise

• HIIT: typically unimodal with rest/recovery intervals for specific training (Gibala et al., 2012; – Usually prescribed intensity

Buchheit & Laursen, 2013)

• HIFT: multimodal utilizing functional (multijoint/muscle) exercises for general physical training; may or may not have rest/recovery intervals – Self-selected intensity (Heinrich et al., 2014; Heinrich et al., 2015; Kliszczewicz et al., 2018)

Rationale • Unclear if HIFT improves multiple fitness domains • Purpose: to examine effects of 6months of HIFT participation on 9 fitness domains

Design • Program evaluation study at a university HIFT gym (K-State CrossFit) open to the public (Feb. 2013-April 2014) – Continuous enrollment – Assessments at baseline, and 6-months

Methods Table 1. Participant Characteristics (N=48) Characteristic

Mean (SD)

N (%)

Female

--

24 (50.0%)

Caucasian

--

42 (87.5%)

Age (years) 31.8 ± 13.3 (Range = 18-66) HIFT experience (months) HIFT participation (days/week)

--

9.8 ± 8.4 (Range = 0–27)

--

4.0 ± 1.1 (Range = 1-7)

--

Testing Procedures • 3 days – 60 minute sessions • Standardized warm-up with 5 minutes of cardio (jog, bike, row, jump rope), and full-body dynamic stretching exercises

Table 2. Measures – Day 1 of the Program Evaluation Study Fitness Domain(s)

Measure(s)

Units

Reference

Coordination and balance

Agility Hop Test

errors

(Demerritt et al., 2002)

Agility

Pro-Agility Test

ss.hh

(Harman et al., 2000)

Flexibility

Flextester Sit-and-Reach

cm

(Hui & Yuen, 2000)

Power

Standing Long Jump & m.cm Seated Medicine Ball Put

(Reiman & Manske, 2009) (Lester et al., 2014)

Muscular endurance

Push-ups in 60 sec Sit-ups in 60 sec Squats in 60 sec Pull-ups

(Reiman & Manske, 2009) (Reiman & Manske, 2009) (adapted from Loudon et al., 2002) (Burnstein et al., 2011)

repetitions

Table 3. Measures – Day 2 of the Program Evaluation Study Fitness Domain

Measure

Strength: Lower Body

1 Rep Max Back Squat

kg

(Reiman & Manske, 2009)

Strength: Upper Body

1 Rep Max Press

kg

(Reiman & Manske, 2009)

kg

(Reiman & Manske, 2009)

Strength: Back and Hamstring 1 Rep Max Deadlift

Units

Reference

Table 4. Measures – Day 3 of the Program Evaluation Study Fitness Domain

Measure

Speed

400m run

Cardiorespiratory Endurance

1.5 mile run

Units m:ss mm:ss

Reference (Rhea, Alvar, & Gray, 2004) (Reiman & Manske, 2009)

Analysis • SPSS 25 – Statistical significance set at p < .05

• Paired samples t-tests • Independent samples t-tests

Results Table 5. Day 1 Fitness Changes from Baseline to 6 months for Females Pretest m (sd)

Posttest m (sd)

t

sig.

23

6.13 (2.70)

5.48 (2.21)

1.10

.285

Pro-Agility Test (seconds)

22

5.93 (0.72)

6.03 (0.80)

0.85

.407

Flextester Sit-and-Reach (cm)

22

31.14 (9.23)

34.09 (8.09)

3.83

.001

Standing Long Jump (m)

22

1.75 (0.33)

1.81 (0.31)

3.04

.006

Seated Medicine Ball Put (m)

22

2.44 (0.30)

2.52 (0.27)

1.98

.061

Push-ups in 60 sec

13

25.23 (6.97)

29.77 (7.78)

2.38

.035

8

28.13 (7.34)

31.00 (4.87)

1.28

.242

Sit-ups in 60 sec

21

41.81 (7.37)

42.81 (9.99)

0.85

.408

Squats in 60 sec

22

44.55 (7.15)

45.68 (7.35)

1.08

.291

6

5.50 (3.73)

6.83 (3.60)

2.39

.062

14

8.86 (7.07)

13.43 (11.31)

1.56

.143

Test

n

Agility Hop Test (errors)

Knee push-ups in 60 sec

Pull-ups Band-assisted pull-ups

Table 6. Day 1 Fitness Changes from Baseline to 6 months for Males Pretest m (sd)

Posttest m (sd)

t

sig.

23

4.83 (3.06)

4.04 (2.44)

1.88

.074

Pro-Agility Test (seconds)

24

5.21 (0.42)

5.21 (0.38)

0.02

.982

Flextester Sit-and-Reach (cm)

23

29.41 (8.83)

32.11 (7.18)

2.99

.007

Standing Long Jump (m)

24

2.36 (0.26)

2.33 (0.23)

1.32

.200

Seated Medicine Ball Put (m)

23

3.09 (0.38)

3.13 (0.35)

0.92

.368

Push-ups in 60 sec

23

37.65 (12.33)

38.30 (11.11)

0.53

.600

Sit-ups in 60 sec

23

45.87 (8.86)

47.04 (7.38)

1.00

.328

Squats in 60 sec

23

51.17 (10.73)

51.74 (8.24)

0.39

.699

Pull-ups

16

10.00 (3.58)

11.88 (4.16)

2.65

.018

Band-assisted pull-ups

5

4.80 (3.77)

7.20 (4.21)

2.14

.099

Test

n

Agility Hop Test (errors)

Table 7. Day 2 and 3 Fitness Changes from Baseline to 6 months for Females Pretest m (sd)

Posttest m (sd)

t

sig.

20

58.11 (12.83)

64.23 (13.88)

4.63