The Effect of Natural or Simulated Altitude Training on High-Intensity Intermittent Running Performance in Team-Sport Athletes: A Meta-Analysis

BackgroundWhile adaptation to hypoxia at natural or simulated altitude has long been used with endurance athletes, it has only recently gained popularity for team-sport athletes.ObjectiveTo analyse the effect of hypoxic interventions on high-intensity intermittent running performance in team-sport athletes.MethodsA systematic literature search of five journal databases was performed. Percent change in performance (distance covered) in the Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test (level 1 and level 2 were used without differentiation) in hypoxic (natural or simulated altitude) and control (sea level or normoxic placebo) groups was meta-analyzed with a mixed model. The modifying effects of study characteristics (type and dose of hypoxic exposure, training duration, post-altitude duration) were estimated with fixed effects, random effects allowed for repeated measurement within studies and residual real differences between studies, and the standard-error weighting factors were derived or imputed via standard deviations of change scores. Effects and their uncertainty were assessed with magnitude-based inference, with a smallest important improvement of 4% estimated via between-athlete standard deviations of performance at baseline.ResultsTen studies qualified for inclusion, but two were excluded owing to small sample size and risk of publication bias. Hypoxic interventions occurred over a period of 7–28 days, and the range of total hypoxic exposure (in effective altitude-hours) was 4.5–33 km h in the intermittent-hypoxia studies and 180–710 km h in the live-high studies. There were 11 control and 15 experimental study-estimates in the final meta-analysis. Training effects were moderate and very likely beneficial in the control groups at 1 week (20 ± 14%, percent estimate, ± 90% confidence limits) and 4-week post-intervention (25 ± 23%). The intermittent and live-high hypoxic groups experienced additional likely beneficial gains at 1 week (13 ± 16%; 13 ± 15%) and 4-week post-intervention (19 ± 20%; 18 ± 19%). The difference in performance between intermittent and live-high interventions was unclear, as were the dose of hypoxia and inclusion of training in hypoxia.ConclusionsHypoxic intervention appears to be a worthwhile training strategy for improvement in high-intensity running performance in team-sport athletes, with enhanced performance over control groups persisting for at least 4 weeks post-intervention. Pending further research on the type of hypoxia, dose of hypoxia and training in hypoxia, coaches have considerable scope for customising hypoxic training methods to best suit their team’s training schedule.