Aerobic high‐intensity intervals are superior to improve V̇O(2max) compared with sprint intervals in well‐trained men

Maximal oxygen uptake (V̇O(2max)) may be the single most important factor for long‐distance running performance. Interval training, enabling high intensity, is forwarded as the format that yields the largest increase in V̇O(2max). However, it is uncertain if an optimal outcome on V̇O(2max), anaerobic capacity, and running performance is provided by training with a high aerobic intensity or high overall intensity. Thus, we randomized 48 aerobically well‐trained men (23 ± 3 years) to three commonly applied interval protocols, one with high aerobic intensity (HIIT) and two with high absolute intensity (sprint interval training; SIT), 3× week for 8 weeks: (1) HIIT: 4 × 4 min at ~95% maximal aerobic speed (MAS) with 3 min active breaks. (2) SIT: 8 × 20 s at ~150% MAS with 10 s passive breaks. (3) SIT: 10 × 30 s at ~175% MAS with 3.5 min active breaks. V̇O(2max) increased more (p < 0.001) following HIIT, 4 × 4 min (6.5 ± 2.4%, p < 0.001) than SIT, 8 × 20 s (3.3 ± 2.4%, p < 0.001) and SIT, 10 × 30 s (n.s.). This was accompanied by a larger (p < 0.05) increase in stroke volume (O(2)‐pulse) following HIIT, 4 × 4 min (8.1 ± 4.1%, p < 0.001) compared with SIT, 8 × 20 s (3.8 ± 4.2%, p < 0.01) and SIT, 10 × 30 (n.s.). Anaerobic capacity (maximal accumulated oxygen deficit) increased following SIT, 8 × 20 s (p < 0.05), but not after HIIT, 4 × 4 min, nor SIT, 10 × 30 s. Long‐distance (3000‐m) endurance performance increased (p < 0.05–p < 0.001) in all groups (HIIT, 4 × 4 min: 5.9 ± 3.2%; SIT, 8 × 20 s: 4.1 ± 3.7%; SIT, 10 × 30 s: 2.2 ± 2.2%), with HIIT increasing more than SIT, 10 × 30 s (p < 0.05). Sprint (300‐m) performance exhibited within‐group increases in SIT, 8 × 20 s (4.4 ± 2.0%) and SIT, 10 × 30 s (3.3 ± 2.8%). In conclusion, HIIT improves V̇O(2max) more than SIT. Given the importance of V̇O(2max) for most endurance performance scenarios, HIIT should typically be the chosen interval format.