Title :

Active Versus Passive Recovery in High-Intensity Intermittent Exercises in Children: An Exploratory Study.

Author(s) :

Baquet, Georges [Auteur]
Unité de Recherche Pluridisciplinaire Sport, Santé, Société (URePSSS) - ULR 7369
Dupont, Gregory [Auteur]
Unité de Recherche Pluridisciplinaire Sport, Santé, Société (URePSSS) - EA 7369
Gamelin, François-Xavier [Auteur]
Unité de Recherche Pluridisciplinaire Sport, Santé, Société (URePSSS) - ULR 7369 - ULR 4488 [URePSSS]
Aucouturier, Julien [Auteur]
Unité de Recherche Pluridisciplinaire Sport, Santé, Société (URePSSS) - EA 7369
Berthoin, Serge [Auteur]
Unité de Recherche Pluridisciplinaire Sport, Santé, Société (URePSSS) - ULR 7369

Journal title :

Pediatric Exercise Science

Abbreviated title :

Pediatr Exerc Sci

Volume number :

31

Pages :

248-253

Publication date :

2019-05-01

ISSN :

1543-2920

English keyword(s) :

Cardiorespiratory Fitness
Child
Female
High-Intensity Interval Training
Humans
Male
Muscle Fatigue
Oxygen Consumption
Physical Endurance
aerobic fitness
field tests
interval training
maximal oxygen uptake

HAL domain(s) :

Sciences du Vivant [q-bio]

English abstract : [en]

This study aimed to compare the effect of active recovery (AR) versus passive recovery (PR) on time to exhaustion and time spent at high percentages of peak oxygen uptake ( ) during short, high-intensity intermittent ...
Show more >This study aimed to compare the effect of active recovery (AR) versus passive recovery (PR) on time to exhaustion and time spent at high percentages of peak oxygen uptake ( ) during short, high-intensity intermittent exercises in children. Twelve children (9.5 [0.7] y) underwent a graded test and 2 short, high-intensity intermittent exercises (15 s at 120% of maximal aerobic speed) interspersed with either 15 seconds of AR (50% of maximal aerobic speed) or 15-second PR until exhaustion. A very large effect (effect size = 2.42; 95% confidence interval, 1.32 to 3.52) was observed for time to exhaustion in favor of longer time to exhaustion with PR compared with AR. Trivial or small effect sizes were found for , peakHR, and peak ventilation between PR and AR, while a moderate effect in favor of higher average values (effect size = -0.87; 95% confidence interval, -1.76 to -0.01) was found using AR. The difference between PR and AR for the time spent above 80% (t80%) and 90% (t90%) of was trivial. Despite the shorter running duration in AR, similar t80% and t90% were spent with AR and PR. Time spent at a high percentage of may be attained by running 3-fold shorter using AR compared with using PR.Show less >

Peer reviewed article :

Oui

Audience :

Internationale

Administrative institution(s) :

Université de Lille
Univ. Artois
Univ. Littoral Côte d’Opale

Collections :

• Unité de Recherche Pluridisciplinaire Sport, Santé, Société (URePSSS) - ULR 7369

Submission date :

2021-11-02T12:27:42Z
2021-11-03T08:21:21Z