Bellissimo · Frontiers in physiology 2022 · within-subject crossover trial · n=12

The Acute Physiological and Perceptual Responses Between Bodyweight and Treadmill Running High-Intensity Interval Exercises.

Cited 23 times in the scientific literature.

Level 3 - non-randomized controlled study

Within-subject crossover physiological study; randomization of protocol order not stated in abstract

PubMed 35360255 · doi:10.3389/fphys.2022.824154 · record verified 2026-08-30

What was done

Twelve adults (age 29.5 ± 5.3 years, VO2peak 48.7 ± 6.5 ml·min⁻¹·kg⁻¹) performed two exercise protocols in a crossover design: treadmill running high-intensity interval exercise (RUN-HIIE: 2 sets of 5 × 60-s intervals at 100% VO2peak speed followed by 60 s walking) and bodyweight calisthenic HIIE (BW-HIIE: 2 sets of 5 × 60-s 'all-out' intervals followed by 60 s marching). Investigators measured VO2, heart rate, blood lactate, rating of perceived exertion (RPE), enjoyment (PACES), creatine kinase (CK), and muscle soreness.

What was found

RUN-HIIE elicited higher relative VO2 (88 ± 3% vs. 77 ± 4% VO2peak; p < 0.001) and higher relative heart rate (93 ± 1% vs. 88 ± 2% HRpeak; p = 0.002) than BW-HIIE. BW-HIIE elicited higher blood lactate (11.2 ± 3.2 vs. 6.9 ± 2.0 mmol/L; p < 0.001) and higher RPE (16 ± 2 vs. 14 ± 2; p = 0.003). Enjoyment (PACES) and CK showed no significant differences between protocols (p > 0.05; exact numerical values not reported in abstract).

Why it matters

Equipment-free bodyweight calisthenic interval exercise provides a viable alternative to running intervals, generating comparable enjoyment and robust metabolic stress despite slightly lower cardiorespiratory demand.

Limits

The study is limited by a small sample size (n = 12) and an exclusively acute single-session design with no long-term training adaptations measured. The abstract does not indicate whether protocol order was randomized, nor does it provide quantitative values for PACES, muscle soreness, or CK.

Cited by