Active vs. passive recovery during an aerobic interval training session in well-trained runners

PURPOSE: To compare cardio-metabolic, perceptual and neuromuscular responses to an aerobic interval training (AIT) running session, with active (AR) vs. passive recovery (PR). METHODS: Eleven well-trained male distance runners (36.63 ± 6.93 years, 59.26 ± 5.27 mL·kg(−1)·min(−1), ⁓ 35 min in 10 km) completed the University of Montréal Track Test (UMTT) and 2 AIT sessions on track in random order, which consisted of 4 × 2 min at 100% of the maximum aerobic speed (MAS), with 2 min of AR at 80% of the velocity associated to the second ventilatory threshold (vVT(2)), or no exercise (i.e., PR). During sessions, oxygen consumption (V̇O(2)), heart rate (HR), blood lactate [La], rating of perceived exertion (RPE), and countermovement jump (CMJ) were continuously monitored. RESULTS: There were no differences in time spent in the “red zone” (i.e. > 90% V̇O(2max)) between sessions (222 ± 73 s AR vs. 230 ± 104 s PR, p = 0.588), although the PR exhibited a greater time spent at peak V̇O(2) close to significance (117 ± 114 vs. 158 ± 109 s, p = 0.056). However, the AR elicited a higher mean V̇O(2) (49.62 ± 5.91 vs. 47.46 ± 4.20 mL·kg(−1)·min(−1), p = 0.021). The AR favored a lower [La] after sessions (6.93 ± 2.22 vs. 6.24 ± 1.93 mmol·L(−1), p = 0.016) and a higher RPE during sessions (15 ± 0.45 vs. 14 ± 0.47, p = 0.045). Meanwhile, the CMJ was significantly potentiated during both sessions. CONCLUSION: Considering that PR elicited lower perceptual loading for a similar cardiorespiratory response, its use would be preferable, at least, for this type of AIT running sessions.