History and perspectives on interval training in sport, health, and disease

Abstract

Exercise can be conducted as low-intensity continuous training (LICT) or a variety of higher intensity work/rest formats, collectively called interval training. Interval training was developed for athletes in the early 20th century. It was systemized in Sweden as Fartlek, and in Germany as die interval Method, in the 1930s. Most contemporary forms of interval training evolved from these progenitors. In essence, interval training allows a large volume of high-intensity or race specific training to be performed while controlling the development of fatigue. Adding interval training to LICT done by athletes adds about 2%-4% to performance achievable with LICT, which represents a competitively meaningful difference in performance (e.g., 4:25 vs. 4:00 over 1 mile). More recently, interval training has been applied to health-fitness participants and even to patients with health conditions. Studies indicate that a comparatively low volume of interval training can produce substantial improvement in physiologic capacity, in as little as 20% of training time versus LICT. There are data indicating that interval training can be reasonably pleasant, have good adherence, and is safe, even in patients. Although interval training was originally designed for athletics, the fundamental patterns of work versus recovery are remarkably similar in healthy adults and patients. Although the total volume of training and both absolute and relative intensity and magnitude of homeostatic disturbance are larger in athletes, the overall pattern of effort is the same in fitness participants and patients. Interval training can thus be characterized as an important step in the evolution of exercise training.