No description available.

Critical Power (CP) is the greatest power that a person can sustain for prolonged periods of time while maintaining steady state conditions. Work-prime (W’) is the amount of work that can be tolerated when exercising in non-steady-state conditions above CP. A person’s CP and W’ strongly influence the metabolic response and tolerance to exercise. PURPOSE: Compare the effect of equal amounts of moderate intensity continuous training (MICT) and high intensity interval training (HIIT) on CP and W’. Critical Power (CP) is the greatest power that a person can sustain for prolonged periods of time while maintaining steady state conditions. Work-prime (W’) is the amount of work that can be tolerated when exercising in non-steady-state conditions above CP. A person’s CP and W’ strongly influence the metabolic response and tolerance to exercise. PURPOSE: Compare the effect of equal amounts of moderate intensity continuous training (MICT) and high intensity interval training (HIIT) on CP and W’. METHODS: Twenty-two (10 female) untrained, young (26.4 ± 0.9 years) adults completed 8 weeks of cycling training (40 min, 3  per week) administered as either MICT cycling (44% max work rate achieved during a maximal graded exercise test; GXTmax) or HITT cycling (4 bouts at 80% GXTmax for 4 min with recovery intervals between). Cycling V̇O2max, CP, W’ and Anaerobic Capacity (i.e., Wingate) were determined before and after training. Specifically, CP was assessed with the work-over-time method derived from 4–5 constant-power tests to exhaustion. RESULTS: MICT (n = 11) and HIIT (n = 11) groups completed the same amount of work over the course of the training (P = 0.76). CP significantly increased in both groups, but to a greater extent in the HIIT group (MICT: 15.7 ± 3.1% vs. HIIT: 27.5 ± 4.3%; P = 0.04). The work that could be performed above CP (i.e., W’) was not significantly impacted by training (p = 0.76). V̇O2max significantly increased in both groups (P < 0.01), and the magnitude tended to be greater in the HIIT group (MICT: 8.3 ± 2% vs. HIIT: 14 ± 2.6%; P = 0.09). Interestingly, the training-induced change in CP was not significantly related to the training-induced change in V̇O2max. The training-induced increase in CP exhibited a positive curvilinear relationship with the training intensity, expressed as a percentage of the initial CP, with those performing the same workout at a greater percentage of CP exhibiting greater training-induced increases in CP (R2 = 0.49, P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: HIIT elicits approximately twice the increase in CP than an equal amount of MICT in untrained young adults. Moreover, the magnitude of increase in CP is strongly related to the intensity of the exercise, relative to CP, even when exercising at the same percentage of GXTmax. Thus, exercise may be more effectively prescribed relative to CP, rather than V̇O2max or GXTmax.