High-intensity functional training (HIFT) is an exercise modality that emphasizes functional, multi-joint movements that can be modified to any fitness level and elicit greater muscle recruitment than more traditional exercise. As a relatively new training modality, HIFT is often compared to high-intensity interval training (HIIT), yet the two are distinct. HIIT exercise is characterized by relatively short bursts of repeated vigorous activity, interspersed by periods of rest or low-intensity exercise for recovery, while HIFT utilizes constantly varied functional exercises and various activity durations that may or may not incorporate rest. Over the last decade, studies evaluating the effectiveness of HIIT programs have documented improvements in metabolic and cardiorespiratory adaptations; however, less is known about the effects of HIFT. The purpose of this manuscript is to provide a working definition of HIFT and review the available literature regarding its use to improve metabolic and cardiorespiratory adaptations in strength and conditioning programs among various populations. Additionally, we aim to create a definition that is used in future publications to evaluate more effectively the future impact of this type of training on health and fitness outcomes.

Wearing face masks is recommended for the prevention of contracting or exposing others to cardiorespiratory infections, such as COVID-19. Controversy exists on whether wearing face masks during vigorous exercise affects performance. We used a randomized, counterbalanced cross-over design to evaluate the effects of wearing a surgical mask, a cloth mask, or no mask in 14 participants (7 men and 7 women; 28.2 ± 8.7 y) during a cycle ergometry test to exhaustion. Arterial oxygen saturation (pulse oximetry) and tissue oxygenation index (indicator of hemoglobin saturation/desaturation) at vastus lateralis (near-infrared spectroscopy) were assessed throughout the exercise tests. Wearing face masks had no effect on performance (time to exhaustion (mean ± SD): no mask 622 ± 141 s, surgical mask 657 ± 158 s, cloth mask 637 ± 153 s (p = 0.20); peak power: no mask 234 ± 56 W, surgical mask 241 ± 57 W, cloth mask 241 ± 51 W (p = 0.49)). When expressed relative to peak exercise performance, no differences were evident between wearing or not wearing a mask for arterial oxygen saturation, tissue oxygenation index, rating of perceived exertion, or heart rate at any time during the exercise tests. Wearing a face mask during vigorous exercise had no discernable detrimental effect on blood or muscle oxygenation, and exercise performance in young, healthy participants (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04557605).

To compare measures of balance, coordination, and mobility between patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and healthy control subjects, and to determine whether differences in these measures are associated with measures of disease severity. The subjects were divided into three groups: 15 patients with COPD who required the use of supplemental oxygen (WO), 15 patients with COPD who did not require the use of supplemental oxygen (NO), and 21 healthy control subjects (CO). The subjects performed spirometry and several measures of balance, coordination, and mobility including the Community Balance and Mobility Scale, the timed up and go test, the fast-gait speed test, posturography, and both a finger-to-nose test and a toe-tapping coordination test. Significance was set at an alpha less than 0.05. When control was used for age, significant differences were found between the WO group and the CO group for the finger-to-nose test, and for both the sway index and peak sway index for the eyes open, moving-platform test. Differences were found among all three groups for the Community Balance and Mobility Scale overall score. The scores for the WO group were significantly worse than for the NO group on the timed up and go and the fast-gait speed tests. Moderate correlation was found among all of the measures, demonstrating significant differences in forced-expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), peak expiratory flow, and forced-expiratory volume. When controls were used for both age and FEV1, between-group differences disappeared. Patients with COPD exhibit deficiencies in functional balance, coordination, and mobility tasks associated with disease severity or differences in activity levels, but not in the requirement for supplemental oxygen.

Purpose: CrossFit^® is a new but extremely popular method of exercise training and competition that involves constantly varied functional movements performed at high intensity. Despite the popularity of this training method, the physiological determinants of CrossFit performance have not yet been reported. The purpose of this study was to determine whether physiological and/or muscle strength measures could predict performance on three common CrossFit "Workouts of the Day" (WODs). Materials and methods: Fourteen CrossFit Open or Regional athletes completed, on separate days, the WODs "Grace" (30 clean and jerks for time), "Fran" (three rounds of thrusters and pull-ups for 21, 15, and nine repetitions), and "Cindy" (20 minutes of rounds of five pull-ups, ten push-ups, and 15 bodyweight squats), as well as the "CrossFit Total" (1 repetition max [1RM] back squat, overhead press, and deadlift), maximal oxygen consumption (VO₂max), and Wingate anaerobic power/capacity testing. Results: Performance of Grace and Fran was related to whole-body strength (CrossFit Total) (r=-0.88 and -0.65, respectively) and anaerobic threshold (r=-0.61 and -0.53, respectively); however, whole-body strength was the only variable to survive the prediction regression for both of these WODs (R²=0.77 and 0.42, respectively). There were no significant associations or predictors for Cindy. Conclusion: CrossFit benchmark WOD performance cannot be predicted by VO₂max, Wingate power/capacity, or either respiratory compensation or anaerobic thresholds. Of the data measured, only whole-body strength can partially explain performance on Grace and Fran, although anaerobic threshold also exhibited association with performance. Along with their typical training, CrossFit athletes should likely ensure an adequate level of strength and aerobic endurance to optimize performance on at least some benchmark WODs.

Randomized controlled trial with repeated measures. To determine the effect of trunk stability training on vertical takeoff velocity. Trunk stability training is commonly used in sports training programs; however, the effects of stability training on performance enhancement are not known. Trunk stability training may provide a more stable pelvis and spine from which the leg muscles can generate action, may better link the upper body to the lower body, or may enhance leg muscle activation, thus promoting optimal force production during sporting activities such as a vertical jump. Fifty-five athletes were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 training groups: trunk stability (TS), leg strength (LS), trunk stability and leg strength (TL), and control (CO). Subjects were tested 3 times: at pretraining, after 3 weeks of training, and after 9 weeks of training. A repeated-measures analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to examine differences among groups for vertical takeoff velocity measured indirectly using a force plate. Pretraining takeoff velocity and body mass were used as covariates. After 3 and 9 weeks, the training groups were not different from each other. After 9 weeks of training, all 3 training groups had a greater takeoff velocity than the control group (P<.05). After 3 weeks of training only the TS group had a greater takeoff velocity than the control group (P<.05). Only the TL group increased significantly in vertical takeoff velocity between the third- and ninth-week testing periods (P<.05). Nine weeks of trunk stability training was similarly effective in enhancing vertical takeoff velocity as leg strength training or the combination of trunk stability and leg strength training.

High-intensity interval training (HIIT) is a time-efficient method of improving aerobic and anaerobic power and capacity. In most individuals, however, HIIT using modalities such as cycling, running, and rowing does not typically result in increased muscle strength, power, or endurance. The purpose of this study is to compare the physiological outcomes of traditional HIIT using rowing (Row-HIIT) with a novel multimodal HIIT (MM-HIIT) circuit incorporating multiple modalities, including strength exercises, within an interval. Twenty-eight recreationally active women (age 24.7 ± 5.4 years) completed 6 weeks of either Row-HIIT or MM-HIIT and were tested on multiple fitness parameters. MM-HIIT and Row-HIIT resulted in similar improvements (p < 0.05 for post hoc pre- vs. post-training increases for each group) in maximal aerobic power (7% vs. 5%), anaerobic threshold (13% vs. 12%), respiratory compensation threshold (7% vs. 5%), anaerobic power (15% vs. 12%), and anaerobic capacity (18% vs. 14%). The MM-HIIT group had significant (p < 0.01 for all) increases in squat (39%), press (27%), and deadlift (18%) strength, broad jump distance (6%), and squat endurance (280%), whereas the Row-HIIT group had no increase in any muscle performance variable (p values 0.33–0.90). Post-training, 1-repetition maximum (1RM) squat (64.2 ± 13.6 vs. 45.8 ± 16.2 kg, p = 0.02), 1RM press (33.2 ± 3.8 vs. 26.0 ± 9.6 kg, p = 0.01), and squat endurance (23.9 ± 12.3 vs. 10.2 ± 5.6 reps, p < 0.01) were greater in the MM-HIIT group than in the Row-HIIT group. MM-HIIT resulted in similar aerobic and anaerobic adaptations but greater muscle performance increases than Row-HIIT in recreationally active women.