Vol.:(0123456789)
Sports Medicine (2023) 53:1609–1640 
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-023-01853-w
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
The Acute Demands of Repeated‑Sprint Training on Physiological, 
Neuromuscular, Perceptual and Performance Outcomes in Team Sport 
Athletes: A Systematic Review and Meta‑analysis
Fraser Thurlow1,3  · Jonathon Weakley1,2,3  · Andrew D. Townshend1  · Ryan G. Timmins1,3  · 
Matthew Morrison1,3  · Shaun J. McLaren4,5 
Accepted: 17 April 2023 / Published online: 24 May 2023 
© Crown 2023
Abstract
Background Repeated-sprint training (RST) involves maximal-effort, short-duration sprints (≤ 10 s) interspersed with brief 
recovery periods (≤ 60 s). Knowledge about the acute demands of RST and the influence of programming variables has 
implications for training prescription.
Objectives To investigate the physiological, neuromuscular, perceptual and performance demands of RST, while also examin-
ing the moderating effects of programming variables (sprint modality, number of repetitions per set, sprint repetition distance, 
inter-repetition rest modality and inter-repetition rest duration) on these outcomes.
Methods The databases Pubmed, SPORTDiscus, MEDLINE and Scopus were searched for original research articles investi-
gating overground running RST in team sport athletes ≥ 16 years. Eligible data were analysed using multi-level mixed effects 
meta-analysis, with meta-regression performed on outcomes with ~ 50 samples (10 per moderator) to examine the influence 
of programming factors. Effects were evaluated based on coverage of their confidence (compatibility) limits (CL) against 
elected thresholds of practical importance.
Results From 908 data samples nested within 176 studies eligible for meta-analysis, the pooled effects (± 90% CL) of 
RST were as follows: average heart rate  (HRavg) of 163 ± 9 bpm, peak heart rate  (HRpeak) of 182 ± 3 bpm, average oxygen 
consumption of 42.4 ± 10.1 mL·kg−1·min−1, end-set blood lactate concentration (B[La]) of 10.7 ± 0.6 mmol·L−1, deciMax 
session ratings of perceived exertion (sRPE) of 6.5 ± 0.5 au, average sprint time (Savg) of 5.57 ± 0.26 s, best sprint time (Sbest) 
of 5.52 ± 0.27 s and percentage sprint decrement (Sdec) of 5.0 ± 0.3%. When compared with a reference protocol of 6 × 30 m 
straight-line sprints with 20 s passive inter-repetition rest, shuttle-based sprints were associated with a substantial increase 
in repetition time (Savg: 1.42 ± 0.11 s, Sbest: 1.55 ± 0.13 s), whereas the effect on sRPE was trivial (0.6 ± 0.9 au). Performing 
two more repetitions per set had a trivial effect on  HRpeak (0.8 ± 1.0 bpm), B[La] (0.3 ± 0.2 mmol·L−1), sRPE (0.2 ± 0.2 au), 
Savg (0.01 ± 0.03) and Sdec (0.4; ± 0.2%). Sprinting 10 m further per repetition was associated with a substantial increase in 
B[La] (2.7; ± 0.7 mmol·L−1) and Sdec (1.7 ± 0.4%), whereas the effect on sRPE was trivial (0.7 ± 0.6). Resting for 10 s longer 
between repetitions was associated with a substantial reduction in B[La] (−1.1 ± 0.5 mmol·L−1), Savg (−0.09 ± 0.06 s) and 
Sdec (−1.4 ± 0.4%), while the effects on  HRpeak (−0.7 ± 1.8 bpm) and sRPE (−0.5 ± 0.5 au) were trivial. All other moderating 
effects were compatible with both trivial and substantial effects [i.e. equal coverage of the confidence interval (CI) across 
a trivial and a substantial region in only one direction], or inconclusive (i.e. the CI spanned across substantial and trivial 
regions in both positive and negative directions).
Conclusions The physiological, neuromuscular, perceptual and performance demands of RST are substantial, with some of 
these outcomes moderated by the manipulation of programming variables. To amplify physiological demands and perfor-
mance decrement, longer sprint distances (> 30 m) and shorter, inter-repetition rest (≤ 20 s) are recommended. Alternatively, 
to mitigate fatigue and enhance acute sprint performance, shorter sprint distances (e.g. 15–25 m) with longer, passive inter-
repetition rest (≥ 30 s) are recommended.
Study Registration Open Science Framework. Registration 
https:// doi. org/ 10. 17605/ OSF. IO/ 2XQ3A
Extended author information available on the last page of the article
1610
 
F. Thurlow et al.
Key Points 
The most common RST set configuration is 6 × 30 m 
straight-line sprints with 20 s of passive inter-repetition 
rest.
The reference estimates for  HRavg (90%  HRmax), VO2avg 
(~ 70–80% VO2max) and B[La] (10.8 mmol·L−1) dem-
onstrate the substantial physiological demands of RST 
in team sport athletes. Associated prediction intervals 
for these estimates suggest that most of these demands 
are consistently substantial across many RST protocols, 
sports and athlete characteristics.
Shorter inter-repetition rest periods (≤ 20 s) and longer 
repetition distances (> 30 m) amplify physiological 
demands and cause greater inter-set reductions in sprint 
performance (i.e. performance fatigue). Inversely, longer 
inter-repetition rest periods (≥ 30 s) and shorter repeti-
tion distances (≤ 20 m) enhance acute sprint perfor-
mance and reduce the physiological demands.
Shuttle-based protocols are associated with slower rep-
etition times, likely due to the added change-of-direction 
component, but may reduce sprint decrement. The effect 
of shuttle versus straight-line RST protocols on physi-
ological and perceptual outcomes remains inconclusive.
Performing two less repetitions per set (e.g. four as 
opposed to six repetitions) maintains the perceptual, 
performance and physiological demands of RST.
The findings from our investigation provide practitioners 
with the expected demands of RST and can be used to 
help optimise training prescription through the manipu-
lation of programming variables.
1 Introduction
Repeated-sprint training (RST) involves maximal-effort, 
short-duration sprints (≤ 10 s), interspersed with brief 
(≤ 60 s) recovery times [1]. It appears an effective and 
time-efficient training modality for physical adaptations in 
team-sport athletes, with as few as six sessions over two 
weeks shown to enhance high-speed running abilities [2]. 
The implementation of RST can also provide athletes with 
exposure to maximal sprinting, acceleration and decel-
eration, which are important components of team sport 
[3–5]. Throughout an athlete’s training program, there is a 
range of opportunities for RST to be used, such as during a 
pre-season where a progressive reduction in running volume 
and an increase in intensity is often implemented [6]. Alter-
natively, it could be employed during the playing season to 
promote the maintenance of specific physical qualities (e.g. 
speed, aerobic fitness), used as part of late-stage rehabilita-
tion or implemented at a time when a training ‘shock-cycle’ 
is required. However, each training program requires differ-
ent outcomes, with these attained through the manipulation 
of programming variables.
The type of stimulus is an important driver of the chronic 
adaptive response to training [7]. Repeated-sprint train-
ing is low-volume and short in duration, typically lasting 
10–20 min per session, but due to the maximal intensity at 
which it is performed, it can generate adaptive events that 
ultimately result in the capacity for enhanced performance 
[8, 9]. This includes an improved aerobic and metabolic 
capacity [10–17]. However, there is considerable variation 
in RST prescription, with acute programming variables (e.g. 
sprint distance, rest duration, number of repetitions) regu-
larly manipulated in research and practice [8, 18]. These 
changes can influence the internal and external load experi-
enced by athletes during RST (i.e. the acute demands) and 
subsequently have the potential to cause diverse training 
adaptations [12]. For instance, in a study by Iaia et al. [19], 
higher within-set blood lactate concentration (~ 3 mmol⋅L−1 
B[La]) was recorded during RST with shorter rest times 
(15 s versus 30 s), which can indicate a greater anaerobic 
contribution to exercise [20]. Accordingly, after six-weeks 
of training, the 15 s rest group achieved greater improvement 
in 200 m sprint time and the Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test 
level 2 compared with the 30 s group [19], with anaerobic 
energy production central to performance in these events 
[21, 22]. Thus, it is important to understand how the manipu-
lation of programming variables affects the acute demands 
of RST, as this evidence can be useful to help explain how 
and why training adaptations may manifest.
There is conflicting evidence within and across studies 
regarding the effects of programming variables on the acute 
demands of RST. In a study by Alemdaroğlu et al. [23], 
B[La] and percentage sprint decrement (Sdec) were greater 
with 6 × 40 m shuttle repeated-sprints compared with the 
same straight-line protocol. Conversely, compared with 
shuttle-based sprints, straight-line sprints induced greater 
demands when more repetitions were performed over a 
shorter distance (8 × 30 m repeated-sprints) [23]. The pre-
scription of active inter-repetition rest has been shown to 
promote higher heart rate and oxygen consumption (VO2) 
compared with passive rest [24]. However, Keir et al. [25] 
found that demands were greater when passive rest, fewer 
repetitions, shorter rest time and a longer sprint distance 
were prescribed. Ultimately, there is an infinite combina-
tion of programming variables that can alter the training 
outcome, but the acute effects of these factors are not well 
1611
Acute Demands of Repeated-Sprint Training
understood. Therefore, to guide training prescription and 
enhance the effectiveness of RST, it is important to gain a 
quantitative understanding of the acute effects of each pro-
gramming factor.
While excessive training loads can contribute to fatigue, 
an appropriate training dose may allow for greater improve-
ments in fitness and performance [26]. Knowledge of the 
acute demands of RST can help practitioners manage fatigue 
and target specific training outcomes. Therefore, our system-
atic review and meta-analysis aims to (1) identify the most 
common RST set configuration, (2) evaluate and summa-
rise the acute physiological, neuromuscular, perceptual and 
performance demands of RST, and (3) examine the meta-
analytic effects of sprint modality, number of repetitions per 
set, sprint repetition distance, inter-repetition rest modality 
and inter-repetition rest duration on the acute RST demands.
2  Methods
2.1  Search Strategy
This study was conducted in accordance with the ‘Preferred 
Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses’ 
(PRISMA) guidelines [27] and registered on Open Science 
Framework (Registration https:// doi. org/ 10. 17605/ OSF. 
IO/ 2XQ3A). A systematic search of the literature was con-
ducted to find original research articles investigating the 
acute demands of RST in team sport athletes. The latest 
search was performed on 10 January 2022, using the elec-
tronic databases Pubmed, SPORTDiscus, MEDLINE and 
Scopus. No restrictions were imposed on the publication 
date. Relevant keywords for each search term were identified 
through pilot searching of titles/abstracts/full-texts of previ-
ously known articles. Key search terms were grouped and 
searched within the article title, abstract and keywords using 
the search phrase (‘repeat* sprint*’ OR ‘intermittent sprint*’ 
OR ‘multiple sprint*’) AND (‘exercise’ OR ‘ability’ OR 
‘training’) AND (‘team sport’ OR ‘players’ OR ‘athletes’) 
AND (‘physiological’ OR ‘perceptual’ OR ‘neuromuscular’ 
OR ‘metabolic’ OR ‘fatigue’) NOT (‘cycling’ OR ‘swim-
ming’). No medical subject headings were applied to the 
search phrase.
Following the initial search of the literature, results were 
exported to EndNote library (Endnote X9, Clarivate Ana-
lytics, USA) and duplicates were removed. The remaining 
articles were then uploaded to Covidence (http:// www. covid 
ence. org, Melbourne, Australia), with the titles and abstracts 
independently screened by two authors (F.T., M.M.). Full-
texts of the remaining articles were then accessed to deter-
mine their final inclusion–exclusion status. Articles selected 
for inclusion were agreed upon by both authors, with any 
disagreements resolved by discussion or a third author 
(J.W.). Furthermore, Google Scholar, as well as reference 
lists of all eligible articles and reviews [1, 8, 9, 28], were 
searched to retrieve any additional studies. Figure 1 dis-
plays the strategy for the study selection process used in 
this review.
2.2  Inclusion–Exclusion Criteria
The inclusion and exclusion criteria can be found in Table 1. 
We chose to omit any studies in which the mean athlete 
age was ≤ 16 years, as children may respond differently 
to RST [29, 30]. Studies were excluded if RST was per-
formed in ≥ 30 °C because larger performance decrements 
may occur in hot compared with cool conditions [31]. We 
acknowledge that the residual effects of intense exercise may 
last up to 72 h [32], but acute demands measured up to 24 h 
following RST was selected because: (a) it is common for 
RST and other team sport activity to be interspersed with 
minimal recovery time (i.e. < 72 h), (b) pilot scoping of the 
literature only identified five studies [33–37] that recorded 
measurements on athletes > 24 h. Several studies/protocols 
were excluded from this investigation that implemented 
repeated-sprint sequences with sport skill elements [38–42] 
or involved a reactive component in response to an external 
stimulus (e.g. light sensor) [43–46]. Evidence from studies 
involving both single-set and multi-set repeated sprints was 
recorded, including the acute demands from repeated-sprint 
ability tests. For studies that involved pre-post testing of 
RST, separated by an intervention period (e.g. training, sup-
plementation), only the RST baseline results were reported 
to ensure that the intervention period did not bias the 
results. Where observational time-series studies measured 
RST across a season, results were included for each phase 
(e.g. pre-season, mid-season, post-season), providing that 
no intervention was implemented outside of usual practice.
2.3  Classification of Study Design
To provide information on study design (Supplementary 
Table S2), studies were categorised under four designs as 
follows: (1) observational – non-experimental, (2) single 
group pre-test post-test – experimental treatment applied to 
a single group of participants, with the dependent variable/s 
measured before and after treatment, (3) crossover – two 
or more experimental conditions applied to the same par-
ticipants, with or without a control condition, (4) parallel 
groups – two or more experimental conditions applied to two 
groups of different participants, with or without a control 
condition. Additionally, single-group time-series designs 
were categorised under observational and denoted.
1612
 
F. Thurlow et al.
2.4  Selection of Outcome Measures 
and Programming Variables
The outcome measures (Table 2) were selected on the basis 
of pilot scoping of the literature that identified commonly 
used indicators of internal responses to exercise and per-
formance capacity in team sport settings [28, 47, 48]. Per-
centage sprint decrement, as defined by Fitzsimons et al. 
[49] and Glaister et al. [50], was chosen as it is the most 
ecologically valid index to quantify fatigue during RST 
[50]. However, caution should be taken when interpreting 
Sdec as weak relative and absolute reliability exists between 
repeated-sprint ability tests [51]. Blood lactate is sensitive 
to changes in exercise intensity and duration and is one of 
the preferred methods used to assess the anaerobic glycolytic 
contribution to exercise [20]. Sprint force–velocity–power 
parameters, as defined by Samozino et al. [52], and spring-
mass model parameters, as defined by Morin et al. [53], were 
chosen as they represent field-based methods used to assess 
the mechanical effectiveness of sprinting and the neuromus-
cular manifestation of fatigue during over-ground running 
[54].
Programming variables recorded were: sprint modality 
(i.e. straight-line, 180° shuttle or multi-directional), number 
Fig. 1  Flow diagram of the 
study selection process
1613
Acute Demands of Repeated-Sprint Training
Table 1  Study inclusion–exclusion criteria
RST repeated-sprint training, U17 under 17 age group, U18 under 18 age group
Criteria Inclusion
Exclusion
1
Original research article
Reviews, surveys, opinion pieces, books, periodicals, editorials, case studies, non-aca-
demic/non-peer-reviewed text
2
Full-text available in English
Cannot access the full text in English
3
Team sport athletes (field- or court-based invasion sports) of any gender
Non-team sports (e.g. solo, racquet or combat sports), ice-, sand- or water-based team 
sports, match officials, non-athletic populations. Studies that described participants as 
playing intermittent sports or used a combination of team sport and non-team sport ath-
letes, unless group results were separated
4
Participants mean age ≥ 16 years. Where mean age was not provided, and if an age group 
was listed as U17 or above, this was accepted
Mean athlete age was < 16 years, or participants were described as U16 or below. Addition-
ally, studies that used a combination of athletes below and above the age cut-off, unless 
group results were separated
5
Healthy, able-bodied, non-injured athletes
Special populations (e.g. clinical, patients), athletes with a physical or mental disability, or 
athletes considered to be injured or returning from injury
6
RST was over-ground running on a flat surface
RST was performed on a treadmill, cycle or another implement. RST was performed on a 
slope or sand
7
RST was performed at maximal intensity, with a mean work duration of ≤ 10 s or ≤ 80 m 
in distance, a recovery duration of ≤ 60 s and ≥ 2 repetitions performed in total. Single 
set and multi-set repeated-sprints
RST was performed at submaximal intensity, with a work duration of > 10 s or > 80 m, a 
recovery duration of > 60 s, and only a single sprint repetition
8
RST was a fixed protocol, without any sport skill elements
RST involved a reactive change of direction in response to an external stimulus (e.g. light 
sensor) or sport skill elements (e.g. passing, kicking, shooting)
9
Studies must have reported ≥ 1 acute outcome measure (outcome measures are presented 
in Sect. 2.3). Acute demands must have occurred during (within) or immediately follow-
ing RST up to 24 h
No relevant outcome measures were reported. RST demands occurred > 24 h
10
≥ 1 condition or group must have performed the intervention under normal conditions 
(e.g. usual nutritional intake, hydrated state, normoxia, absence of ergogenic aids, 
≤ 30 °C, regular warm-up protocol)
RST was performed in a possibly fatigued or potentiated state (e.g. sports training, maximal 
fitness assessment, pre-conditioning strategies) occurring within or 24 h before RST. 
Placebo treatments were used before or during RST
11
Sprint times were recorded using electronic timing gates
Sprint times were recorded with a hand-held stopwatch or a video-camera
1614
 
F. Thurlow et al.
of repetitions per set, number of sets per session, sprint dis-
tance or duration per repetition, inter-repetition rest dura-
tion, inter-repetition rest modality, inter-set rest duration and 
inter-set rest modality.
2.5  Extraction of Study Information
Mean and standard deviation data were extracted directly 
from tables and within the text of the included studies. To 
obtain data from studies where information was provided in 
figures, graph digitising software (WebPlotDigitizer, ver-
sion 4.3, USA) was used. For studies where rest duration 
was given as an exercise to rest ratio or on a time cycle 
that included sprint time, an estimated ‘actual’ rest time was 
also established. This was determined by extracting aver-
age sprint time (Savg) data from studies, where provided. 
For example, if Savg was 3.2 s and the recovery duration 
was given as 1:5 exercise to rest ratio, then the estimated 
recovery duration was 16 s, or if the recovery duration was 
given on a 30 s cycle, then the estimated recovery duration 
was 27 s, with recovery durations rounded to the nearest 
whole number.
With regards to sprint modality, shuttle repeated-sprints 
were defined as RST where one or more 180° changes of 
direction were performed. Multi-directional repeated-sprints 
involved RST where changes of direction were performed 
with angles other than 180°, but due to the large variety of 
designs (e.g. different angles and courses), this format was 
excluded from the meta-analysis. For rest modality, ‘passive’ 
included protocols where participants were required to walk 
back to a two-way start line (sprints alternating from both 
ends) in preparation for the next sprint. Where information 
relating to exercise protocols (e.g. sprint distance) could 
not be found within the study or clarification was required, 
authors were contacted. If authors did not respond, samples 
were removed from the meta-analysis. The Participant Clas-
sification Framework [55] was used to define training and 
performance calibre of the athletes included in our investiga-
tion (Supplementary Table S2).
Twenty-four estimates nested within 13 studies collected 
session ratings of perceived exertion (sRPE) via Borg’s 
6–20 scale. For consistency with other included studies and 
to comply with more standard practice, 6–20 values were 
converted to Category–Ratio 10  (CR10®) units (deciMax) 
using the appropriate table conversion [56]. Standard devia-
tions were converted by a factor that was proportionate to the 
mean value of each estimate, which ranged between 13–19 
(conversion factors = 0.27–0.53). Where VO2 was expressed 
in absolute terms (L·min−1) [25], it was converted to relative 
terms (mL⋅min−1⋅kg−1) by extracting the mean body mass 
of the participants from the study. Where Sdec of 5% was set 
as the termination criteria [57], the mean number of repeti-
tions was used for meta-analysis. Heart rates were inclusive 
of both the sprint component and inter-repetition rest peri-
ods, but samples were excluded [58] which continuously 
Table 2  Summary of the 
outcome measures of interest
sRPE session ratings of perceived exertion, CR10 Category-Ratio 10, CMJ counter movement jump, JH 
jump height, FVP force–velocity–power, V0 theoretical maximal velocity, F0 theoretical maximal force, P0 
theoretical maximal power, RFpeak maximal ratio of force, DRF slope/rate of decrease in ratio of force with 
increasing velocity, SMM spring-mass model, Kvert vertical stiffness, Kleg leg stiffness, ΔL leg compression, 
Δz centre of mass vertical displacement, Fzmax maximal vertical force, HR heart rate, HRavg average heart 
rate, HRpeak peak heart rate, HRpost heart rate recorded immediately post exercise, % HRmax percentage of 
maximal heart rate, CK serum creatine kinase, CK 24h serum creatine kinase measured 24 h post exercise, 
B[La] blood lactate, VO2avg average oxygen consumption, % VO2peak percentage of peak oxygen consump-
tion, % VO2max percentage of max oxygen consumption, Sbest best sprint time, Savg average sprint time, Stotal 
total sprint time, Sdec percentage sprint decrement
Category
Measure
Metric
Physiological
HR
HRavg,  HRpeak,  HRpost and/or %  HRmax
CK
CK 24 h
B[La]
Post (0–10 min)
VO2
VO2avg, VO2peak and/or % VO2max
Neuromuscular
CMJ
JH
Sprint FVP parameters as defined 
by Samozino et al. [43]
V0, F0, P0,  RFpeak, DRF
SMM parameters as defined by 
Morin et al. [44]
Kvert, Kleg, ΔL, Δz, Fzmax
Perceptual
sRPE
CR10® and 6–20 sRPE scales [46]
Performance
Sprint times
Sbest, Savg, Stotal
Sdec
As defined by Fitzsimons [40] and 
Glaister et al. [41]
1615
Acute Demands of Repeated-Sprint Training
recorded heart rate during the inter-set rest periods. Due to a 
lack of studies reporting the effect of RST on peak heart rate 
 (HRpeak) as a percentage of maximal heart rate  (HRmax), this 
data was unable to be meta-analysed. However, these results 
[2, 59–62] are summarised in section 3.4.3. Post-exercise 
B[La] samples were meta-analysed together, irrespective of 
the exact time point that they were measured (i.e. 0–10 min). 
Although, for context, specific timepoints of each sample are 
given in Supplementary Table S3. Where studies provided 
multiple timepoints of B[La] collection, the highest value 
was used for meta-analysis. The considerable variation in 
measurement error between different jump systems makes 
it difficult to compare counter-movement jump (CMJ) height 
between different studies [63] and as such, CMJ height 
results were recorded, but not meta-analysed. For context, 
the type of jump measurement systems used in each study 
are noted alongside the results in Supplementary Table S3.
2.6  Assessment of Reporting Quality and Risk 
of Bias
To assess the reporting quality and risk of bias within the 
studies included in this review, two authors (F.T. and M.M.) 
independently evaluated the literature using a modified ver-
sion of the Downs and Black index. This scale includes 14 
original items and ranks each item as 0 or 1, with higher 
total scores (out of 14) indicating higher quality studies. The 
original Downs and Black scale was reported to have accept-
able test–retest (r = 0.88) and inter-rater reliability (r = 0.75) 
[64]. If there was an absence of clear information to assess 
an item on either scale, it was scored as 0. Any disagree-
ments between the two authors were resolved by discussion 
or a third author (J.W.).
2.7  Data Analysis
All analyses were performed in the statistical computing 
software R (Version 4.0.0; R Core Team, 2020). Studies eli-
gible for meta-analysis often reported RST outcomes from 
several subgroups (e.g. elite versus non-elite, males versus 
females, etc.), from repeated measures taken on the same 
group of athletes (e.g. set 1 and set 2, warm-up A versus 
warm-up B, etc.), or a combination of both. To appropri-
ately account for this hierarchical structure, in particular, 
the within-study correlation arising from repeated measures 
[65] and on the assumption that the true acute demand of 
RST varies between studies [66], data were analysed using 
multi-level mixed-effects meta-analysis via the metafor 
package [67]. Initial (baseline) models were run for each 
outcome measure with 10 or more estimates and fit using 
restricted maximum-likelihood. These models included only 
random effects, which were specified in a nested structure 
as studies (i.e. individual research papers; outer factor) and 
groups within studies (inner factor, [65]). Units of analy-
sis were therefore individual estimates from groups within 
studies, given as the mean value of the outcome measure 
following RST. Both the associated standard deviation 
(SD) and sample size were used to calculate the variance 
of each estimate. When a study involved repeated measures 
(i.e. multiple rows of data for the same group of athletes), 
dependency was accounted for by replacing variance with 
the entire ‘V’ matrix; that is, the variance–covariance matrix 
of the estimates [65]. Block-diagonal covariance matrices 
were estimated with an assumed correlation of r = 0.5 using 
the clubSandwich package [68]. Since it is uncommon for 
studies to report the correlation coefficient between repeated 
measures [69], our assumption was informed by re-analysis 
of our previous (unpublished) work in team-sport RST.
Uncertainty in meta-analysed estimates was expressed 
using 90% compatibility (confidence) intervals (CI), calcu-
lated based on a t-distribution with denominator degrees of 
freedom given from the unique number of ‘group’ levels 
(i.e. the inner level of the random effects structure). Pooled 
estimates were also presented with 90% prediction intervals, 
which convey the likely range of the true demand of RST 
in similar future studies [70]. Between-study and between-
group heterogeneity in each meta-analysed estimate was 
quantified as a SD [Sigma (σ)] [71]), with 90% CI calculated 
using the Q-profile method [72].
To examine the effect of programming variables on 
acute RST outcomes, candidate factors were added to the 
aforementioned baseline models as fixed effects for out-
comes with sufficient estimates available (approximately 
10 per moderator [73]). The five moderator variables were: 
sprint modality (categorical: straight-line or 180° shuttle), 
number of repetitions per set (continuous, linear), total dis-
tance covered in each repetition (continuous, linear), inter-
repetition rest modality (categorical: active or passive) and 
inter-repetition rest duration (continuous, linear). Factors 
were re-scaled so that the reference (intercept) effect repre-
sented the performance or response to 6 m × 30 m straight-
line sprints with 20 s passive rest between repetitions. The 
effects of each moderator were then estimated (along with 
90% CI and 90% prediction intervals, where appropriate), 
with all other factors being held constant. Categorical 
moderators were given as the difference between levels 
(shuttle compared with straight-line sprints and active 
compared with passive inter-repetition rest). Continuous 
moderators were evaluated at a magnitude deemed to be 
practically relevant for training prescription: performing 
two more repetitions, sprinting 10 m further per repetition 
and resting for 10 s longer between repetitions. The effects 
of repetition distance on repetition time (average and fast-
est sprint) were not shown (but were still offset to a dis-
tance of 30 m), because the time taken to complete a sprint 
repetition is almost entirely dependent on the distance to 
1616
 
F. Thurlow et al.
be covered. The total amount of variance explained by 
the combination of moderators was given as a pseudo-R2 
value, calculated by subtracting the total (pooled) variance 
from final models ( 휎2
mods ) as a fraction of baseline models 
( 휎2
base ) from 1 (1 − [휎2
mods∕휎2
base]).
To provide an interpretation of programming modera-
tors, we (subjectively) considered the entire range of the 
CI representative of values compatible with our models 
and assumptions [74], relying mostly on the point esti-
mate. To further contextualise the practical relevance of 
moderators, we visually scaled effects against regions of 
practical significance. That is, reference values for each 
outcome measure that have been empirically or theoreti-
cally anchored to some real-world importance in the con-
text of team-sport athletes and/or RST. These thresholds 
were: 2 bpm (~ 1%) in  HRpeak [75], 1 au in CR10-scaled 
sRPE [76], a 1% faster or slower sprint time [77] based on 
the reference performance given as the intercept: 0.05 s 
for Savg, 0.04 s for best sprint time (Sbest) and 1% for Sdec 
across a set [77]. In absence of a recognised practical 
reference value for a change in B[La] above the anaero-
bic threshold, we used the value of a small, standardized 
effect. Between-athlete standard deviations from included 
estimates (n = 120) were meta-analysed on the log scale, 
as previously described (SD = 1.9 mmol·L−1, 90% CI 
1.7–2.22), before being multiplied by 0.2. The threshold 
for a moderate standardised effect (0.6 × 1.9 mmol·L−1) 
was also calculated and shown for visual purposes. When 
a CI fell entirely inside the region of practical significance 
or predominantly inside one region, we declared an effect 
as trivial. When a CI fell entirely outside the region of 
practical significance or predominantly outside the region, 
we declared an effect substantial. If there was equal cover-
age of the CI across the trivial region and the substantial 
region in only one direction (i.e. positive or negative), 
the effect was deemed compatible with both trivial and 
substantial effects. Finally, when the CI spanned across 
substantial regions in both positive and negative direc-
tions, including the trivial region, an effect was deemed 
inconclusive.
3  Results
Following the screening process (Fig. 1), 215 publications 
were included in our investigation, with data from 908 sam-
ples nested within 176 studies eligible for meta-analysis. 
Across all studies, there were 4818 athlete inclusions from 
282 repeated-sprint protocols reported.
3.1  Study Characteristics
The most common study design for investigations of acute 
demands of RST was single group, cross sectional observa-
tional (n = 87 studies, 40%). Soccer was the most investi-
gated sport (n = 104, 48%), followed by basketball (n = 33, 
15%), rugby (league, union and sevens) (n = 15, 7%), futsal 
(n = 14, 7%), handball (n = 12, 6%), field hockey (n = 10, 
5%), Australian rules football (n = 5, 2%), volleyball (n = 3, 
1%), netball (n = 2, 1%) and a mixture of team sports (n = 17, 
8%). Of these sports, 21 (10%) studies involved elite/inter-
national level athletes, 125 (58%) studies involved highly 
trained/national level athletes and 58 (27%) studies involved 
trained/development level athletes, with 11 (5%) studies not 
reporting the training and performance calibre of the ath-
letes. Female athletes were represented in 31 (14%) stud-
ies. A summary of the participants and study characteristics 
of included publications are provided in Supplementary 
Table S2.
3.2  Outcomes for the Assessment of Reporting 
Quality and Risk of Bias
Supplementary Table S1 summarises the outcomes of the 
modified Downs and Black scale for the assessment of 
reporting quality and risk of bias. Results ranged from 7 to 
12, with a mean score of 9.6 ± 0.9.
3.3  Study Outcomes
A summary of the training protocols and study outcomes 
of included publications are provided in Supplementary 
Table S3.
Performance outcomes were represented in 198 (92%) 
of studies and the most common outcome measure was Sdec 
(n = 127 studies, 59%) (Fig. 2). The most common prescrip-
tion of each programming variable were straight-line sprints 
(n = 153 protocols, 54%), performed over 30 m (n = 107, 
38%), with a passive recovery (n = 186, 66%) lasting 20 s 
(n = 83, 29%), prescribed as one set of six repetitions 
(n = 122, 43%; Fig. 3). The majority of protocols (n = 263, 
93%) employed one set of repeated-sprints, with two sets, 
three sets and four sets used in five (2%), ten (4%) and four 
(1%) protocols, respectively. The most common inter-set 
rest times for all multi-set protocols were 4 (six protocols) 
and 5 mins (five protocols). The number of 180° changes of 
direction prescribed for shuttle repeated-sprints ranged from 
one to two. The most prescribed mode of active recovery 
was a slow jog back to a one-way start line (n = 32 protocols, 
33%, i.e. sprints start from one end only). There was one 
1617
Acute Demands of Repeated-Sprint Training
study [33] that strictly enforced a 5 m deceleration zone and 
one other study [78] that enforced a 6 m deceleration zone. 
3.3.1  Meta‑analysed Acute Demands of Repeated‑Sprint 
Training
The acute physiological, perceptual and performance 
demands of RST in team sport athletes are presented in 
Table 3. Also presented are the 90% CI and PI for each 
estimate, as well as the between sample and between study 
variation (σ).
3.3.2  Moderating Effects of Programming Variables 
on the Acute Demands of Repeated‑Sprint Training
The moderating effects of programming variables on the 
acute physiological, perceptual and performance demands 
of RST are presented in Figs. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 
13, 14, 15. All effects were evaluated as the change in 
each outcome measure when compared with a reference 
protocol of 6 m × 30 m straight-line sprints with 20 s pas-
sive inter-repetition rest. Unless noted in the subsequent 
sections, moderating effects were deemed inconclusive 
[i.e. a confidence level (CL) spanning across substantial 
regions in both positive and negative directions, including 
the trivial region].           
3.3.2.1 Shuttle‑Based Sprints Shuttle-based sprints were 
associated with a substantial increase in Savg and Sbest (i.e. 
slower times; Figs. 10, 11, 12, 13), whereas the effect on 
sRPE was trivial (Figs.  6, 7). Performing shuttle-based 
sprints was compatible with both a trivial and substantial 
reduction in Sdec [i.e. a less pronounced decline in sprint 
times (faster) throughout the set; Figs. 14 and 15].
3.3.2.2 Performing Two More Repetitions Per Set Per-
forming two more repetitions per set had a trivial effect on 
 HRpeak (Figs. 4 and 5), sRPE (Figs. 6 and 7), Savg (Figs. 12 
and 13), Sdec (Figs. 14 and 15) and B[La] (Figs. 8 and 9). 
Additionally, performing two more repetitions per set was 
compatible with both a trivial and substantial increase in 
Sbest (i.e. slower time; Figs. 10 and 11).
3.3.2.3 Sprinting 10 m Further Per Repetition Sprinting 
10 m further per repetition was associated with a substan-
tial increase in B[La] (Figs. 6 and 7) and Sdec [i.e. a more 
pronounced decline in sprint times (slower) throughout 
Fig. 2  The distribution of outcome measures. Data given as the total 
number of studies represented (out of 215). Sbest best sprint time, 
Savg average sprint time, Stotal total sprint time, Sdec percentage sprint 
decrement, CMJ counter-movement jump, SMM spring-mass model 
characteristics, FVP sprint force–velocity–power profiling, sRPE rat-
ings of perceived exertion, HR heart rate, B[La] blood lactate, CK 
serum creatine kinase, VO2 oxygen consumption
1618
 
F. Thurlow et al.
the set; Figs. 14 and 15], whereas the effect on sRPE was 
trivial (Figs. 6 and 7). Additionally, sprinting 10 m further 
per repetition was compatible with both a trivial and sub-
stantial increase in  HRpeak (Figs. 4 and 5). The effects on 
Sbest and Savg were not evaluated.
3.3.2.4 Resting for 10 s Longer Resting for 10  s longer 
between repetitions was associated with a substantial 
reduction in B[La] (Figs. 8 and 9), Savg (Figs. 12 and 13), 
and Sdec (Figs.  14 and 15), while the effects on  HRpeak 
(Figs. 4 and 5) and sRPE (Figs. 6 and 7) were trivial. Rest-
ing for 10  s longer between repetitions was compatible 
with both a trivial and substantial reduction in Sbest (i.e. 
faster time; Figs. 10 and 11).
3.3.2.5 Performing Active Inter‑Repetition Rest Using an 
active inter-repetition rest modality was compatible with 
both a trivial and substantial increase in  HRpeak (Figs. 4 and 
5), sRPE (Figs. 6 and 7) and Sdec (Figs. 14 and 15).
Fig. 3  The distribution of RST prescription across all 282 protocols. Data are given as the total number of protocols represented (percentage) 
[range]
1619
Acute Demands of Repeated-Sprint Training
3.3.3  Acute Demands of Repeated‑Sprint Training 
on Non‑Meta‑Analysed Outcomes
The acute demands of straight-line and shuttle RST on 
non-meta-analysed outcomes are as follows: total sprint 
time ranged from 7.82 to 86.09 s (number of studies = 102, 
number of samples = 185), end-set heart rate  (HRpost) ranged 
from 139 to 191 bpm (n = 4 and 12),  HRpeak as %  HRmax 
ranged from 85% to 97% (n = 4 and 12), average VO2 as 
a percentage of maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max) 
ranged from 73% to 83% (n = 3 and 6) and creatine kinase 
measured 24 h post-session ranged from 354 to 1120 µ·L−1 
(n = 6 and 8). The absolute change in CMJ height ranged 
from 2.4 to −8.6 cm (n = 9 and 20) and the percent change 
ranged from 8% to −27% (n = 10 and 21). Results from 
studies that investigated spring-mass model parameters 
(n = 2 and 2) and sprint force–velocity–power parameters 
(n = 1 and 1) are provided in Supplementary Table S3.
3.3.4  Acute Demands of Multi‑directional Repeated‑sprint 
Training
The acute demands of multi-directional RST are as follows: 
Sdec ranged from 1% to 7% (number of studies = 13, number 
of samples = 24), Sbest ranged from 4.36 to 8.21 s (n = 11 
and 19), Savg ranged from 4.14 to 8.39 s (n = 12 and 22), 
total sprint time ranged from 32.22 to 83.99 s (n = 9 and 11), 
end-set B[La] ranged from 5.4 to 15.4 mmol·L−1 (n = 6 and 
8), sRPE ranged from 5.5 to 9.1 au (n = 6 and 10) and  HRpeak 
ranged from 178 to 195 b·min−1 (n = 6 and 10).
Table 3  Meta-analysed acute physiological, perceptual and performance demands of repeated-sprint training in team sport athletes
Multi-directional protocols are excluded. Heart rate results are independent of each other (HRpeak ≠ HRmax)
CI confidence interval, PI prediction interval, HRavg average heart rate, % HRmax percentage of maximal heart rate, HRpeak peak heart rate, 
VO2avg average oxygen consumption, B[La] blood lactate, sRPE session ratings of perceived exertion, Sbest best sprint time, Savg average 
sprint time, Sdec percentage sprint decrement
Outcome measure
Number of…
Pooled effect
Variation (σ, 90% CI) between…
Studies
Samples
Estimate
90% CI
90% PI
Studies (σ1)
Samples (σ2)
HRavg
bpm
12
24
163
154 to 171
131 to 194
16 (11 to 24)
6 (4 to 9)
%  HRmax
10
21
90
87 to 92
82 to 97
3 (2 to 6)
2 (1 to 3)
HRpeak
bpm
29
54
182
179 to 184
168 to 195
7 (6 to 10)
2 (1 to 3)
VO2avg
mL·kg−1·min−1
6
6
42.4
32.3 to 52.4
16.0 to 68.7
9.2 (0.0 to 20.6)
2.4 (0.8 to 9.4)
B[La]
mmol·L−1
64
120
10.7
10.1 to 11.3
5.6 to 15.8
2.6 (2.1 to 3.1)
1.7 (1.4 to 2.0)
sRPE
au (deciMax)
40
68
6.5
6.0 to 6.9
3.5 to 9.5
1.2 (0.7 to 1.6)
1.3 (1.1 to 1.6)
Sbest
s
103
191
5.52
5.26 to 5.79
2.79 to 8.25
1.57 (1.40 to 1.79)
0.45 (0.40 to 0.51)
Savg
s
112
200
5.57
5.31 to 5.82
2.83 to 8.3
1.54 (1.37 to 1.74)
0.57 (0.51 to 0.65)
Sdec
%
125
224
5.0
4.7 to 5.3
1.4 to 8.7
2.0 (1.8 to 2.3)
0.9 (0.8 to 1.1)
Fig. 4  The moderating effects of programming variables on peak heart rate during repeated-sprint training with team sport athletes
1620
 
F. Thurlow et al.
Fig. 5  The moderating effects of a sprint modality, b inter-repetition rest mode, c repetitions per set, d total repetition distance and e inter-repeti-
tion rest time on peak heart rate during repeated-sprint training with team sport athletes. Larger circles, greater study size
Fig. 6  The moderating effects of programming variables on session ratings of perceived exertion following repeated-sprint training with team 
sport athletes
1621
Acute Demands of Repeated-Sprint Training
Fig. 7  The moderating effects of a sprint modality, b inter-repetition 
rest modality, c repetitions per set, d total repetition distance and e 
inter-repetition rest time on session ratings of perceived exertion fol-
lowing repeated-sprint training with team sport athletes. Larger cir-
cles, greater study size
Fig. 8  The moderating effects of programming variables on end-set blood lactate following repeated-sprint training with team sport athletes
1622
 
F. Thurlow et al.
Fig. 9  The moderating effects of a sprint modality, b inter-repetition rest modality, c total number of repetitions, d total repetition distance and e 
inter-repetition rest time on end-set blood following repeated-sprint training with team sport athletes. Larger circles, greater study size
Fig. 10  The moderating effects of programming variables on best sprint time during repeated-sprint training with team sport athletes
1623
Acute Demands of Repeated-Sprint Training
4  Discussion
This systematic review and meta-analysis provides the first 
comprehensive synthesis of the acute demands of RST in 
team sport athletes. It contains data from 215 studies, 282 
repeated-sprint protocols and 4818 athlete inclusions. We 
demonstrate that physiological, neuromuscular, perceptual 
and performance demands incurred during RST are con-
sistently substantial; a finding supported by both the meta-
analysed point estimates and their 90% prediction intervals 
(Table 3). Moreover, the magnitude of these acute demands 
can be influenced by the manipulation of programming vari-
ables (Table 4). Prescribing longer sprint distances (> 30 m) 
and/or shorter (≤ 20 s) inter-repetition rest can increase 
physiological demands and performance decrement. Con-
versely, the most effective strategy to mitigate the acute 
decline in sprint performance is the prescription of longer 
inter-repetition rest times (≥ 30 s) and shorter sprint dis-
tances (15–25 m). The effects of performing two more rep-
etitions per set on our outcomes was trivial, which suggests 
that prescribing a lower number of successive sprints (e.g. 
four as opposed to six) may be a useful strategy to reduce 
Fig. 11  The moderating effects of a sprint modality, b inter-repetition rest modality, c repetitions per set and d inter-repetition rest time on best 
sprint time during repeated-sprint training with team sport athletes. Larger circles,  greater study size
1624
 
F. Thurlow et al.
sprint volume, while maintaining the desired physiologi-
cal demands. The influence of shuttle-based protocols and 
inter-repetition rest modality remain largely inconclusive. 
These findings from our review and meta-analysis can be 
used to inform RST prescription and progression in team 
sport athletes.
Repeated-sprint training is one method among an array 
of training options that practitioners can use to enhance the 
physical performance of team sport athletes. The meta-ana-
lytic estimate of sRPE (Table 3) indicates that RST is per-
ceived to be ‘very hard’ (90% PI: ‘moderate’ to ‘extremely 
hard’), which agrees with the intended prescription of this 
training modality [18, 79]. Taking into account that a typical 
RST session lasts for between 10–20 min, the sRPE-training 
load (sRPE × training duration) is a fraction of that observed 
during team sport practice [80–82], being approximately 
65–130 au (deciMax units). However, this should be consid-
ered alongside the physiological and neuromuscular stresses 
imposed by the RST session. The 10.1–11.3 mmol·L−1 ref-
erence estimate of B[La] is well above the second lactate 
threshold (~ 4 mmol·L−1) and therefore indicates that there is 
an immediate and intensive demand placed on the anaerobic 
glycolytic system during RST [83]. A high rate of anaero-
bic energy production, accompanied by a B[La] response 
exceeding 10 mmol·L−1, may be an important stimulus to 
elicit positive long-term changes in enzymes central for 
anaerobic glycolysis [28, 84]. Therefore, to potentially opti-
mise the anaerobic adaptations to RST for team sport ath-
letes, sessions that cause a B[La] demand of > 10 mmol·L−1 
should be prescribed. Practitioners should also be conscious 
of the neuromuscular demands (i.e. impairment in the mus-
cles ability to produce force) imposed by RST, with con-
siderable decrements in CMJ height observed immediately 
after its implementation. However, while fatigue may be 
detrimental to acute performance, it also can be important 
for adaptation [85].
Athletes can reach VO2max during RST [86] and the aver-
age VO2 demand is considerable (Table 3), corresponding 
to approximately 70%–80% of VO2max for the normal team 
sport athlete [87–90]. This also agrees with studies reporting 
the average VO2 demands of RST as a percentage of the ath-
letes measured VO2max [24, 59, 60]. Training sessions spent 
with longer periods of time at a high percentage of VO2max 
have been suggested to be an optimal stimulus for enhanc-
ing aerobic fitness, particularly in well-trained athletes [79, 
91–93]. If the objective is to maximise aerobic adaptations, 
practitioners should therefore prescribe RST sessions that 
induce an average VO2 demand of > 90% max (or > 95% 
maximal heart rate) [79, 94], which could be achieved by 
manipulating certain programming variables in isolation 
and/or combination. Although moderator analysis of VO2 
was not feasible due to a low number of samples, qualitative 
synthesis indicates that longer sprint distances [86], active 
rest periods [24] and shuttle-based RST [59, 60] can amplify 
the VO2 demands. While RST is a time-efficient training 
method that can induce small to large improvements across 
a range of physical parameters [8, 9], practitioners should, 
however, consider that RST is unlikely to be the best tool for 
eliciting time at or near VO2max and ultimately, for enhancing 
aerobic fitness [9, 79]. Pursuing utmost change in this area 
by implementing excessively demanding protocols could 
mitigate the improvement of other physical qualities (e.g. 
speed). Manipulating programming variables based on the 
goals of the training program is therefore crucial to regulate 
the acute demands of RST and optimise specific adaptations.
4.1  Sprint Modality
There were a greater number of RST protocols that pre-
scribed straight-line sprints (n = 153, 54%) compared 
with shuttle RST (n = 105, 37%) and multi-directional 
RST (n = 24, 9%). Across the 24 protocols that prescribed 
Fig. 12  The moderating effects of programming variables on average sprint time during repeated-sprint training with team-sport athletes
1625
Acute Demands of Repeated-Sprint Training
multi-directional repeated-sprints [46, 95–111], there were 
a variety of different designs and angles implemented, rang-
ing from 45° to 135°, for 2–5 changes of direction. Given 
the multitude of programming variables to consider, meta-
analysis of multi-directional RST was not feasible. None-
theless, we found that consistently high  HRpeak (178–195 
bpm and 92%–100%  HRmax), sRPE (5.5–9.1 au) and post-
session B[La] (5.4–15.4 mmol·L−1) were reported across 
all multi-directional protocols. Multi-directional sequences 
were designed to replicate specific movement demands of 
team sports, where rapid changes of direction are common 
[5, 112, 113]. Moreover, previous research has identified that 
straight-line speed and change of direction ability are differ-
ent physical qualities because of their distinct biomechanical 
determinants [112, 113]. Greater application of multi-direc-
tional and shuttle-based RST may therefore be used to help 
develop change of direction ability, but practitioners should 
be aware of the acute demands of each modality.
Compared to straight-line RST, our meta-analysis shows 
that sprint times are clearly slower during shuttle-based RST 
Fig. 13  The moderating effects of a sprint modality, b inter-repetition rest modality, c repetitions per set and d inter-repetition rest time on aver-
age sprint time during repeated-sprint training with team sport athletes. Larger circles, greater study size
1626
 
F. Thurlow et al.
Fig. 14  The moderating effects of programming variables on sprint time decrement during repeated-sprint training with team sport athletes
Fig. 15  The moderating effects of a sprint modality, b inter-repetition rest modality, c repetitions per set, d total repetition distance and e inter-
repetition rest time on sprint time decrement during repeated-sprint training with team sport athletes. Larger circles, greater study size
1627
Acute Demands of Repeated-Sprint Training
(Figs. 10 and 12), but Sdec is less (Fig. 14). Practitioners 
can therefore expect slower sprint velocity when changes of 
direction are implemented, but athletes may be able to better 
sustain their initial sprint performance. The effects on  HRpeak 
and B[La] were inconclusive (Figs. 4 and 8), while the effect 
on sRPE was mostly trivial (Fig. 6), which may suggest that 
these physiological and perceptual demands of RST are 
independent of sprint modality. It should be noted, however, 
that the acute demands of RST performed with changes of 
direction are conditional to the number and angle of direc-
tion changes, the distance between each direction change and 
the duration of the sequence [60, 99, 106, 114, 115]. These 
factors affect the absolute speeds that are attained and the 
muscular work performed during the sprint, propulsive and 
braking components. Additionally, by integrating changes of 
direction into RST, there is accumulation of acceleration and 
deceleration which can increase the neuromuscular demand 
[99]. This seems evident by greater reductions in CMJ height 
following shuttle-based RST [104, 116, 117].
Shuttle-based sprints can be applied during a RST pro-
gram to emphasise change of direction, limit absolute run-
ning speeds and induce a similar physiological demand to 
straight-line RST. There may be instances, such as towards 
the end of season, where practitioners want to limit the phys-
iological stress on the athlete during shuttle or multi-direc-
tional RST. In these cases, it has been demonstrated that 
decreasing the sprint duration through time-matched proto-
cols is an effective strategy [99]. Therefore, when design-
ing RST, practitioners need to consider the influence of the 
direction changes on the duration of the sprint, rather than 
just the overall distance, as this can have a marked effect on 
the internal demands [99]. Of course, straight-line sprints 
should be implemented if the goal is to expose athletes to 
higher speeds.
4.2  Number of Sprint Repetitions and Sets
Repeated-sprint training is implemented in research and 
practice to target a broad range of outcomes, which is 
reflected by considerable variation in the number of sprint 
repetitions prescribed across studies (range 2–40 repeti-
tions per set). The vast majority of protocols (n = 257, 94%) 
implemented just one set, with six repetitions the most 
prescribed number of sprints per set (n = 122 protocols, 
43%). Protocols that prescribed ≥ 12-repetitions per set 
[19, 33–35, 61, 62, 86, 118–128] were often designed to 
induce a high degree of fatigue. Accordingly, high creatine 
kinase responses (542–1127 µ·L−1) were reported in studies 
prescribing high repetition protocols [33–35, 123], despite 
longer inter-repetition rest times (≥ 30 s). These long-series 
of exhaustive efforts are counterintuitive to the movement 
demands of team sports, where sprint efforts are more likely 
to occur in small clusters [129, 130]. While the moderating 
effects of the number of sets per session was not meta-ana-
lysed due to the low number of samples, it is worth noting 
that with an increasing number of sets, sprint times decayed 
and heart rate was increased, but changes in B[La] seem 
negligible [58, 122, 131]. Further investigation is required 
to better understand the impact of the number of sets per-
formed per session, as well as the overall session volume, 
on the acute demands of RST.
A substantial physiological demand is induced with the 
prescription of just six sprint repetitions, as demonstrated by 
the estimates and PI’s for  HRpeak and B[La] (Figs. 4 and 8). 
A large cardiac demand, inferred by the 182 bpm reference 
estimate of  HRpeak, coupled with a B[La] response exceed-
ing 10 mmol·L−1, provide a strong aerobic and anaerobic 
stimulus, which may underpin the improvements in high-
speed running abilities observed after RST interventions [2, 
8]. With the reference estimate of B[La] above 10 mmol·L−1 
Table 4  Summary of the effects 
of programming variables on 
the acute demands of repeated-
sprint training in team sport 
athletes
HRpeak
B[La]
sRPE
Sbest
Savg
Sdec
Shuttle RST
?
?
=
↑
↑
= ↓
Two more repetitions
=
=
=
= ↑
=
=
10 m longer distance
= ↑
↑
=
*
*
↑
Active rest
= ↑
?
= ↑
= ↓
↓
= ↑
10 s longer rest
=
↓
=
↓
↓
↓
Acute demands based on meta-analytic inferences and compared with the reference protocol of 
6 m × 30 m straight-line sprints with 20 s passive inter-repetition rest
Symbols: ‘=’ indicates ‘trivial’, ‘↑’ substantial increase’, ‘↓’ indicates a ‘substantial decrease’, ‘= ↓’ 
indicates ‘compatibility with both a trivial and substantial decrease’, ‘= ↑’ indicates ‘compatibility with 
both a trivial and substantial increase’, ‘?’ indicates ‘inconclusive’ and ‘*’ indicates that the effects 
were not evaluated. Note: a decrease in Sbest and Savg indicates that sprint times are faster
RST repeated-sprint training, HRpeak peak heart rate, B[La] blood lactate, sRPE session ratings of per-
ceived exertion, Sbest best sprint time, Savg average sprint time, Sdec percentage sprint decrement
1628
 
F. Thurlow et al.
and  HRpeak close to maximal after six repetitions, further 
pursuing small increases in these acute physiological out-
comes by performing more repetitions does not seem worth-
while. Our meta-analytic estimates show that the effects 
of performing two more repetitions per set was trivial on 
all outcome measures except Sbest, which was compatible 
with both trivial and substantial effects (Fig. 10). There-
fore, other programming factors appear to have a greater 
effect on physiological, perceptual and performance out-
comes. Crude estimation of the number of additional sprints 
required for the point estimate of each outcome measure to 
equal the minimum practically important difference reveals 
an unrealistic and impractical expectation. For example, the 
number of additional repetitions needed to increase sRPE 
by a one-unit scale change in our data is ten (i.e. 16-repeti-
tions per set in total). This increase in volume and the neu-
romuscular demands of high repetition sets (greater than ten 
repetitions) may induce excessive muscle damage [33–35, 
123]. Moreover, large numbers of repetitions can result in 
‘pacing’ strategies that influence the maximal nature of RST 
and accumulated fatigue reduces the effectiveness of later 
sprints [132]. This is supported by our findings that show a 
Sdec of 1.2% would be expected to occur in studies (groups) 
performing 6 more repetitions (i.e. 12-repetitions per set in 
total) [77]. Therefore, excessive numbers of sprint repeti-
tions can exacerbate fatigue and cause sub-optimal perfor-
mance during RST.
Lower numbers of repetitions per set (e.g. greater than six 
repetitions) may be a more effective programming approach 
during competition periods to reduce training volume while 
still providing a potent physiological stimulus and allow-
ing for the quality of each repetition to be maintained. In 
this regard, the trivial reduction expected in each outcome 
measure when performing four versus six repetitions may 
be beneficial, when viewing from a risk-reward perspective. 
However, a one-size-fits-all approach regarding the RST pre-
scription for team sport athletes can lead to some athletes 
being under-stimulated, while others can be overloaded, 
depending on the athletes’ speed and fitness profile [133, 
134]. When the number of repetitions performed is fixed, 
there is considerable inter-individual variation in the degree 
of fatigue experienced across the same group of athletes 
[48]. This can be incurred despite two athletes having simi-
lar maximal aerobic speeds but different maximal sprinting 
speeds (i.e. differences in anaerobic speed reserve) [134, 
135]. In our review, all studies, except one [57], prescribed a 
fixed number of repetitions. However, in the study by Aken-
head et al. [57] the level of relative sprint decrement (5%) 
was prescribed with a ‘flexible’ repetition scheme, which 
allowed more control over the magnitude of fatigue accrued 
by all participants. By prescribing a level of relative sprint 
decrement or relative performance threshold, instead of a 
fixed number of repetitions, practitioners can individualise 
RST prescription. This could provide practitioners with the 
ability to autoregulate training load based on differences in 
physical capacities and fluctuations in prior fatigue.
4.3  Sprint Distance
A sprint distance of 30 m was most implemented (n = 107 
protocols, 38%), which is longer than the average sprint 
distance typically observed during field-based team-sports 
competitions (15–25 m) [136]. Additionally, 40 m was the 
longest sprint distance prescribed (n = 74, 26%). This dis-
tance is commonly used as a proxy measure of maximal 
speed in team sport athletes [137, 138], as it can allow maxi-
mal velocity to be reached when it is applied in a straight-
line format. Furthermore, both 30 m and 40 m were often 
implemented as a shuttle format, with one to two changes 
of direction. A distance of 14 m was the shortest sprint 
effort prescribed, represented in two protocols [139], while 
15 m was prescribed in 11 (4%) protocols. Compared with 
longer sprints (> 30 m), these shorter distances emphasise 
the acceleration phase of sprinting and were often applied 
with court-based athletes (i.e. basketball and handball) [122, 
139–141]. Shorter distances may better reflect the competi-
tive environment of court-based team sports where players 
are engaged in sprint efforts of 15 m and less [119, 142, 
143].
Despite the prevalence of studies implementing a sprint 
distance of 30 m, altering the distance of each sprint effort 
by 10 m had the largest moderating effect on B[La] (substan-
tial increase), Sdec (substantial increase [more pronounced 
decline in sprint times]) and  HRpeak (compatible with a triv-
ial and substantial increase). Longer sprints increase phos-
phocreatine (PCr) depletion and glycolytic activity, while 
also resulting in an increased accumulation of metabolic 
by-products (e.g. hydrogen ions, inorganic phosphate) [1, 
136]. Furthermore, longer sprints provide exposure to faster 
absolute running speeds and higher vertical ground reaction 
forces that are attained via upright running mechanics [144, 
145]. This is compared with shorter distances, where the 
athlete spends a high proportion of time in the acceleration 
phase, resulting in a greater horizontal propulsive force, but 
smaller braking force [144, 145]. Consequently, there can 
be a greater strain on the musculoskeletal system during 
longer sprints [146–148]. This is evident through greater 
declines in sprint kinematics (i.e. vertical stiffness and centre 
of mass vertical displacement) when longer sprint distance 
(35 m versus 20 m) was prescribed in two studies that inves-
tigated spring-mass model characteristics [54, 149]. Despite 
a greater physiological and neuromuscular demand imposed 
by longer sprints, the effect of a 10 m longer sprint on sRPE 
was trivial (Fig. 6). This suggests that greater distances can 
be prescribed without inducing a practically substantial 
increase in perceived exertion.
1629
Acute Demands of Repeated-Sprint Training
When beginning a RST program, shorter distances 
(15–25 m) are a more conservative option that can be used 
to limit metabolic stress and neuromuscular strain. It may 
also be beneficial to prescribe shorter distances during 
maintenance/taper sessions or for athletes who may never 
be exposed to longer sprints during competition (e.g. court-
based athletes, goalkeepers). Training progression and over-
load can then be achieved by gradually increasing distance 
(> 30 m) with a view to expose athletes to faster absolute 
running speeds, greater fatigue and a high physiological 
demand. This could be implemented during preparation 
phases before commencing high-intensity training drills 
and match-play, or during late-stage return to play follow-
ing injury.
4.4  Inter‑repetition Rest Duration
There was considerable heterogeneity in the distribution 
of inter-repetition rest duration across the protocols, which 
ranged from 10 to 60 s. This was partly due to differences in 
the approach to rest prescription, whereby pre-determined 
times, time-cycles and work-to-rest ratios were all employed 
in different literature. A 10 s rest duration was prescribed 
in 11 (4%) protocols, but such short rest may make it dif-
ficult for athletes to safely decelerate and make it back to 
the start-line in time for the next sprint. The most common 
rest durations were 20 s and 30 s, represented in 83 (29%) 
and 67 (24%) protocols, respectively. These rest durations 
are similar to the amount of recovery time typically afforded 
between sprints during team sport competition [129, 130]. 
A 60 s rest duration was implemented in 9 (3%) protocols.
Shorter rest times (e.g. 10 s versus 20 s) are associated 
with slower sprint times, greater performance fatigue and 
an increased metabolic response. Additionally, shorter rest 
may lead to greater decrements in CMJ height following 
RST [150]. Inversely, longer inter-repetition rest times (e.g. 
30 s vs 20 s) have a substantial influence on the reduction of 
B[La] and allow for sprint performance to be better main-
tained across a set (i.e. faster Savg and lower Sdec). This is 
likely due to greater clearance of metabolic by-products and 
increased PCr resynthesis [1, 121]. An interesting finding 
of our study was that a 10-s longer inter-repetition rest had 
a trivial effect on  HRpeak and sRPE. Longer inter-repetition 
rest may allow athletes to perform each repetition with 
greater speed [151] and reduce the desire for pacing. Fur-
thermore, longer rest would be expected to increase set dura-
tion, thereby allowing both heart rate and VO2 to increase 
with time [86, 106, 122]. It is possible, however, that the 
cardiorespiratory demand could be blunted if prolonged rest 
times (e.g. 60 s) are implemented. This was demonstrated 
in a group of well-trained university students where VO2 
was 9% less when 60-s rest times were used during RST, 
compared with 30 s rest [151].
Collectively, our findings support the use of longer rest 
durations (≥ 30 s) to reduce within session fatigue and main-
tain repetition quality. Longer rest times could therefore be 
implemented during periods of fixture congestion to reduce 
player fatigue during RST, or used during the intensifica-
tion stage of a pre-season to maximise sprint performance 
[19]. Additionally, longer rest times are recommended 
when longer sprint distances are prescribed, which can help 
account for the extended work duration of these sequences. 
However, longer rest durations reduce the metabolic demand 
of RST, which could limit certain physiological adaptations 
(e.g. maximal accumulated oxygen deficit, changes in glyco-
lytic enzymes) [28, 152] and performance in activities that 
require a substantial anaerobic component [19]. Therefore, 
shorter rest durations (≤ 20 s) can be prescribed to induce 
greater levels of fatigue, which could help prepare team-
sport athletes for peak periods of a match, where sprint 
efforts can be interspersed with minimal rest [129, 130].
4.5  Inter‑repetition Rest Modality
There were a higher number of protocols that implemented 
passive inter-repetition rest (n = 186, 66%), as opposed to 
an active rest period (n = 96, 34%). Active recovery pro-
tocols were commonly combined with inter-repetition rest 
durations of ≥ 25 s. Most protocols that prescribed an active 
recovery involved a slow jog at pre-defined running speeds 
(e.g. 2 m⋅s−1) or self-selected speeds, which were often 
returning to a one-way start line. Other active recovery pro-
tocols implemented faster running speeds such as 8 km⋅h−1 
[23, 118] and 50% of maximal aerobic speed [24, 86, 153, 
154]. When these faster running speeds were prescribed, 
the physiological demands (i.e. heart rate, VO2, B[La]) were 
amplified and there was a greater Sdec compared with passive 
rest and active rest performed at a slow jog [24, 153–155]. 
Repeated jumps were performed during the inter-repetition 
rest period in two studies [59, 156], which increased the car-
diorespiratory and muscular demands [59, 156]. However, 
the internal demands are likely to be more varied compared 
with a precise running intensity.
The findings of our meta-analysis suggest that active rest 
may cause a substantial increase in  HRpeak (Fig. 4), sRPE 
(Fig. 6) and Sdec (Fig. 14), although we acknowledge that 
these effects are also compatible with trivial values (i.e. 
there could be no substantial influence). Active recovery 
limits the oxidative potential for PCr resynthesis before each 
sprint, which affects the maintenance of muscle power [24, 
133, 150]. This leads to greater declines in anaerobic work 
capacity and subsequently, repeated-sprint performance. On 
the contrary, passive recovery is associated with an enhanced 
PCr resynthesis and as our results confirm, a smaller Sdec 
[157, 158]. While there were no substantial differences 
in B[La] (Fig. 8), our meta-analysis does not consider the 
1630
 
F. Thurlow et al.
intensity of the recovery period, which ultimately deter-
mines the extent of the acute demands [59, 153, 157].
The prescription of active recovery might amplify 
the physiological and perceptual demands to RST, as well 
as performance decrement, without increasing the sprint 
volume. This could be achieved, for example, by prescrib-
ing active recovery at an intensity of ≥ 50% maximal aero-
bic speed. It would be practical to implement this with a 
standardised recovery-run distance and rest durations of 
≥ 25 s to allow the athlete to gradually decelerate from the 
sprint component into the recovery running speed. Yet, once 
again, acknowledging that the influence of active recovery 
on  HRpeak, sRPE and Sdec were compatible with both trivial 
and substantial effects, we advise practitioners to place more 
emphasis on recovery duration for manipulating RST acute 
demands at present. For this reason, future research should 
examine the effects of specific active recovery intensities on 
RST physiological, perceptual, neuromuscular and perfor-
mance demands.
4.6  RST Protocols with Additional Modifications
The use of additional modifications to RST can be applied 
to augment or attenuate internal demands. Short enforced 
deceleration zones (< 10 m), which were prescribed in two 
studies [33, 78], reduce sprint performance and exacerbate 
the magnitude of muscle damage due to the large eccentric 
forces applied during rapid braking, which is further accen-
tuated when higher numbers of repetitions are performed. 
Gradual deceleration zones (> 10 m) are therefore recom-
mended to mitigate undue muscular damage. Performing 
repeated jumps within the inter-repetition rest period may be 
an effective strategy to induce a greater physiological stimu-
lus during RST, while exposing athletes to sport-specific 
actions, without an increase in the volume of high-intensity 
running [59, 156]. When jumps were prescribed in studies 
by Buchheit et al. [59] and Padulo et al. [156], very high 
B[La] (10.2–13.1 m⋅mol−1),  HRpeak (96%–97% heart rate 
max) and sRPE (7.9–8.0 au) were observed. The additional 
muscular work performed during the recovery period with 
jumps has previously been shown to increase muscle deoxy-
genation of the lower limbs, but it should be noted that these 
sequences are also likely to reduce acute sprint performance 
[59, 156]. Furthermore, with only two studies investigating 
the effects of jumps within the inter-repetition rest period, 
the optimal volume and intensity of these actions are yet to 
be established. There is potential for other modifications to 
be implemented during RST, such as sport-specific skills 
(e.g. passing, shooting), grappling, push-ups and tackling 
into contact bags. These types of explosive efforts typically 
precede or follow high-intensity runs/sprints during match 
play [159–161] and may help to better simulate the physi-
ological demands associated with competition. Furthermore, 
flying sprints that incorporate a submaximal acceleration 
zone may provide exposure to repeated bouts of maximal 
velocity sprinting, without the neuromuscular demands of 
rapid acceleration [162].
4.7  Limitations
There are several important issues to consider when inter-
preting our findings. Depending on the outcome measure, 
a proportion of the variation in the meta-analysed acute 
demands of RST can be explained by factors other than 
the programming variables investigated (Supplementary 
Table S4). Factors directly related to individual differences 
in human physiology have been shown to influence the acute 
demands to RST, such as age [36, 100, 101, 111, 163–166], 
fitness level [167], playing status [46, 168–174], gender 
[131, 139, 175, 176] and ethnicity [177]. Furthermore, a 
proportion of the variation in the acute demands may also 
be due to the impact of programming variables not inves-
tigated (e.g. number of sets), as well varied data collection 
methods, conditions and reporting. For example, there are 
inter- and intra-individual differences in B[La] accumulation 
depending on sampling procedures (time and site), hydration 
status, previous exercise and ambient temperature [18, 47, 
178]. Nevertheless, the influence of the latter factors on the 
present review are likely to be low considering that item ten 
in the inclusion–exclusion criteria ensures that RST must 
have been performed under normal conditions (e.g. hydrated 
state, ≤ 30 °C) and without fatiguing exercise occurring in 
the previous 24 h. We also appreciate the concerns of com-
paring CMJ height between different methods and devices 
[179], which is why CMJ outcomes were not meta-analysed.
When interpreting acute heart rate and VO2 responses to 
training, it is important to consider the starting value at the 
commencement of exercise, which will influence the magni-
tude of change. However, the majority of studies did not pre-
sent this information, and thus, we were unable to account 
for this in our analyses. Additionally, there was an insuffi-
cient number of samples to determine the moderating effects 
of programming variables on average heart rate and VO2. 
There was also a low number of samples for  HRpeak as % 
 HRmax, creatine kinase, spring mass-model parameters and 
sprint force–velocity–power parameters, which meant we 
were unable to meta-analyse these outcomes. Therefore, in 
future, researchers may wish to investigate the effects of RST 
on these outcomes. Finally, it should be noted that while our 
elected reference adjustments of 10 m and 10 s allow for 
comparison between sprint distance and inter-repetition rest 
time, respectively, this will not always represent the same 
relative change (i.e. an increased sprint distance from 10 m 
to 20 m represents a 100% change, while 30 m–40 m rep-
resents a 25% change). Therefore, this information should 
1631
Acute Demands of Repeated-Sprint Training
be treated with caution and used within the context of the 
programmed session.
5  Conclusions
Our systematic review and meta-analysis is the first to sum-
marise the acute physiological, neuromuscular, perceptual 
and performance demands of RST in team sport athletes, 
while providing a quantitative synthesis of the effects of pro-
gramming variables. RST provides a potent physiological 
stimulus for the physical development of team sport ath-
letes, with the magnitude of the acute demands influenced 
by several programming variables (Table 4). Longer sprint 
distances and shorter inter-repetition rest periods are the 
most efficacious strategies to increase RST demands. When 
manipulated in combination, these factors are likely to have 
an even greater effect, from which the magnitude of within-
session fatigue and acute training response can be expected 
to follow. Reducing the number of repetitions per set (e.g. 
four as opposed to six) can maintain the physiological, per-
ceptual and performance demands of RST while reducing 
sprint volume. When combined with shorter sprint distances 
and increased inter-repetition rest periods, this might be a 
useful strategy during strenuous training and competition 
periods [26]. Additionally, straight-line, shuttle and multi-
directional repeated-sprints can be prescribed to target 
movement specific outcomes, depending on the aims of the 
training program. While there is a large quantity of evidence 
relating to acute performance outcomes of RST, there is a 
lack of literature on cardiorespiratory (e.g. VO2) and neuro-
muscular demands. The insights from our review and meta-
analysis provide practitioners with the expected demands of 
RST and can be used to help optimise training prescription 
through the manipulation of programming variables.
Supplementary Information The online version contains supplemen-
tary material available at https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s40279- 023- 01853-w.
Declarations 
Funding Open Access funding enabled and organized by CAUL and 
its Member Institutions.
Conflict of Interest All authors declare that they have no conflict of 
interests relevant to the content of this review.
Data Availability All data and material reported in this systematic 
review and meta-analyses are from peer-reviewed publications. All 
extracted data is available in Supplementary Tables S2 and S3.
Author Contributions Fraser Thurlow, Jonathon Weakley, Matthew 
Morrison and Shaun McLaren conceptualised the review and crite-
ria. Fraser Thurlow, Jonathon Weakley, Matthew Morrison and Shaun 
McLaren completed the screening, data extraction and data analysis 
of all data within this manuscript. All authors created the tables and 
figures. All authors contributed to the writing of the manuscript. All 
authors reviewed, refined and approved the final manuscript.
Open Access  This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attri-
bution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adapta-
tion, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long 
as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, 
provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes 
were made. The images or other third party material in this article are 
included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated 
otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in 
the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not 
permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will 
need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a 
copy of this licence, visit http:// creat iveco mmons. org/ licen ses/ by/4. 0/.
References
 1. Girard O, Mendez-Villanueva A, Bishop D. Repeated-sprint 
ability—part I. Sports Med. 2011;41(8):673–94.
 2. Taylor JM, Macpherson TW, McLaren SJ, Spears I, Weston M. 
Two weeks of repeated-sprint training in soccer: to turn or not 
to turn? Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2016;11(8):998–1004.
 3. Mendiguchia J, Conceição F, Edouard P, Fonseca M, Pereira R, 
Lopes H, et al. Sprint versus isolated eccentric training: Com-
parative effects on hamstring architecture and performance in 
soccer players. PLoS One. 2020;15(2): e0228283.
 4. Malone S, Roe M, Doran DA, Gabbett TJ, Collins K. High 
chronic training loads and exposure to bouts of maximal veloc-
ity running reduce injury risk in elite Gaelic football. J Sci 
Med Sport. 2017;20(3):250–4.
 5. Taylor JB, Wright AA, Dischiavi SL, Townsend MA, Marmon 
AR. Activity demands during multi-directional team sports: a 
systematic review. Sports Med. 2017;47(12):2533–51.
 6. Bompa TO, Buzzichelli C. Periodization: theory and methodol-
ogy of training. J Hum Kinet. 2019.
 7. Coffey VG, Hawley JA. The molecular bases of training adapta-
tion. Sports Med. 2007;37(9):737–63.
 8. Taylor J, Macpherson T, Spears I, Weston M. The effects of 
repeated-sprint training on field-based fitness measures: a 
meta-analysis of controlled and non-controlled trials. Sports 
Med. 2015;45(6):881–91.
 9. Manuel Clemente F, Ramirez-Campillo R, Nakamura FY, 
Sarmento H. Effects of high-intensity interval training in men 
soccer player’s physical fitness: a systematic review with meta-
analysis of randomized-controlled and non-controlled trials. J 
Sports Sci. 2021;39(11):1202–22.
 10. Boer P, Van Aswegen M. Effect of combined versus repeated 
sprint training on physical parameters in sub-elite football 
players in South Africa. J Phys Educ Sport. 2016;16(3):964.
 11. Bravo DF, Impellizzeri FM, Rampinini E, Castagna C, Bishop 
D, Wisloff U. Sprint vs. interval training in football. Int J 
Sports Med. 2008;29(08):668–74.
 12. Ross A, Leveritt M. Long-term metabolic and skeletal 
muscle adaptations to short-sprint training. Sports Med. 
2001;31(15):1063–82.
 13. Fernandez-Fernandez J, Zimek R, Wiewelhove T, Ferrauti A. 
High-intensity interval training vs. repeated-sprint training in 
tennis. J Strength Cond Res. 2012;26(1):53–62.
 14. Gantois P, Batista GR, Aidar FJ, Nakamura FY, de Lima-Júnior 
D, Cirilo-Sousa MS, et al. Repeated sprint training improves 
1632
 
F. Thurlow et al.
both anaerobic and aerobic fitness in basketball players. Isoki-
net Exerc Sci. 2019;27(2):97–105.
 15. Kaynak K, Eryılmaz SK, Aydoğan S, Mihailov D. The effects 
of 20-m repeated sprint training on aerobic capacity in college 
volleyball players. Biomed Hum Kinetics. 2017;9(1):43–50.
 16. Maggioni MA, Bonato M, Stahn A, La Torre A, Agnello L, 
Vernillo G, et al. Effects of ball drills and repeated-sprint-abil-
ity training in basketball players. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 
2019;14(6):757–64.
 17. Serpiello FR, McKenna MJ, Bishop DJ, Aughey RJ, Caldow 
MK, Cameron-Smith D, et al. Repeated sprints alter signaling 
related to mitochondrial biogenesis in humans. Med Sci Sports 
Exerc. 2012;44(5):827–34.
 18. Buchheit M, Laursen PB. High-intensity interval training, solu-
tions to the programming puzzle. Part 2: anaerobic energy, 
neuromuscular load and practical applications. Sports Med. 
2013;43:927–54.
 19. Iaia FM, Fiorenza M, Larghi L, Alberti G, Millet GP, Girard 
O. Short-or long-rest intervals during repeated-sprint training 
in soccer? PLoS One. 2017;12(2): e0171462.
 20. Beneke R, Leithäuser RM, Ochentel O. Blood lactate diag-
nostics in exercise testing and training. Int J Sports Physiol 
Perform. 2011;6(1):8–24.
 21. Krustrup P, Mohr M, Nybo L, Jensen JM, Nielsen JJ, Bangsbo 
J. The Yo-Yo IR2 test: physiological response, reliabil-
ity, and application to elite soccer. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 
2006;38(9):1666.
 22. Hautier C, Wouassi D, Arsac L, Bitanga E, Thiriet P, Lacour J. 
Relationships between postcompetition blood lactate concentra-
tion and average running velocity over 100-m and 200-m races. 
Euro J Appl Physiol. 1994;68(6):508–13.
 23. Alemdaroğlu U, Köklü Y, Bektaş F, Çelik G, Ünver F, Duffield 
R. Comparison of repeated sprint tests in young soccer players: 
straight versus shuttle. Kinesiol Slov. 2018;24(2):5–16.
 24. Madueno MC, Dalbo VJ, Guy JH, Giamarelos KE, Spiteri T, 
Scanlan AT. Reduced fatigue in passive versus active recovery: 
an examination of repeated-change-of-direction sprints in basket-
ball players. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2018;13(8):1034–41.
 25. Keir DA, Thériault F, Serresse O. Evaluation of the running-
based anaerobic sprint test as a measure of repeated sprint 
ability in collegiate-level soccer players. J Strength Cond Res. 
2013;27(6):1671–8.
 26. Laursen P, Buchheit M. Science and application of high-intensity 
interval training. J Hum Kinet. 2019.
 27. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group. 
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-anal-
yses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7): e1000097.
 28. Bishop D, Girard O, Mendez-Villanueva A. Repeated-sprint abil-
ity—part II. Sports Med. 2011;41(9):741–56.
 29. Ratel S, Williams C, Oliver J, Armstrong N. Effects of age and 
recovery duration on performance during multiple treadmill 
sprints. Int J Sports Med. 2006;27(01):1–8.
 30. Groslambert A, Mahon AD. Perceived exertion. Sports Med. 
2006;36(11):911–28.
 31. Girard O, Brocherie F, Bishop D. Sprint performance under heat 
stress: a review. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2015;25:79–89.
 32. Doeven SH, Brink MS, Kosse SJ, Lemmink KA. Postmatch 
recovery of physical performance and biochemical markers in 
team ball sports: a systematic review. BMJ Open Sport Exerc 
Med. 2018;4(1): e000264.
 33. Woolley B, Jakeman J, Faulkner J. Multiple sprint exercise with 
a short deceleration induces muscle damage and performance 
impairment in young, physically active males. J Athl Enhance. 
2014;3:2.
 34. Clifford T, Berntzen B, Davison GW, West DJ, Howatson G, 
Stevenson EJ. Effects of beetroot juice on recovery of muscle 
function and performance between bouts of repeated sprint exer-
cise. Nutrients. 2016;8(8):506.
 35. Howatson G, Milak A. Exercise-induced muscle damage follow-
ing a bout of sport specific repeated sprints. J Strength Cond Res. 
2009;23(8):2419–24.
 36. Klatt S, Kossmann M, Hottenrott L, Ferrauti A, Fasold F. Per-
formance changes and recovery time in U20 and older hand-
ball players after a high-intensity sprint exercise. Appl Sci. 
2021;11(11):5301.
 37. Eryılmaz SK, Aslankeser Z, Özdemir Ç, Özgünen K, Kurdak 
S. Effects of training load changes on physical performance 
and exercise-induced muscle damage. Rev Bras Med Esporte. 
2019;25:509–14.
 38. López-Segovia M, Pareja-Blanco F, Jiménez-Reyes P, González-
Badillo JJ. Determinant factors of repeat sprint sequences in 
young soccer players. Int J Sports Med. 2015;36(02):130–6.
 39. Lemmink K, Elferink-Gemser M, Visscher C. Evaluation of the 
reliability of two field hockey specific sprint and dribble tests in 
young field hockey players. Br J Sports Med. 2004;38(2):138–42.
 40. Johnston RD, Gabbett TJ. Repeated-sprint and effort ability in 
rugby league players. J Strength Cond Res. 2011;25(10):2789–95.
 41. Austin DJ, Gabbett TJ, Jenkins DG. Reliability and sen-
sitivity of a repeated high-intensity exercise performance 
test for rugby league and rugby union. J Strength Cond Res. 
2013;27(4):1128–35.
 42. Iacono AD, Ardigò LP, Meckel Y, Padulo J. Effect of small-
sided games and repeated shuffle sprint training on physical 
performance in elite handball players. J Strength Cond Res. 
2016;30(3):830–40.
 43. Di Mascio M, Ade J, Bradley PS. The reliability, validity and 
sensitivity of a novel soccer-specific reactive repeated-sprint test 
(RRST). Eur J Appl Physiol. 2015;115(12):2531–42.
 44. Wragg C, Maxwell N, Doust J. Evaluation of the reliability and 
validity of a soccer-specific field test of repeated sprint ability. 
Eur J Appl Physiol. 2000;83(1):77–83.
 45. Di Mascio M, Ade J, Musham C, Girard O, Bradley PS. Soccer-
specific reactive repeated-sprint ability in elite youth soccer 
players: maturation trends and association with various physical 
performance tests. J Strength Cond Res. 2020;34(12):3538–45.
 46. Brini S, Boullosa D, Calleja-González J, Delextrat A. Construct 
validity and reliability of a new basketball multidirectional reac-
tive repeated sprint test. Int J Environ Res. 2021;18(20):10695.
 47. Halson SL. Monitoring training load to understand fatigue in 
athletes. Sports Med. 2014;44(2):139–47.
 48. Morcillo JA, Jiménez-Reyes P, Cuadrado-Peñafiel V, Lozano 
E, Ortega-Becerra M, Párraga J. Relationships between 
repeated sprint ability, mechanical parameters, and blood 
metabolites in professional soccer players. J Strength Cond Res. 
2015;29(6):1673–82.
 49. Fitzsimons M, Dawson B, Ward D, Wilkinson A. Cycling and 
running tests of repeated sprint ability. Aust J Sci Med Sport. 
1993;25:82.
 50. Glaister M, Howatson G, Pattison JR, McInnes G. The 
reliability and validity of fatigue measures during multi-
ple-sprint work: an issue revisited. J Strength Cond Res. 
2008;22(5):1597–601.
 51. Lopes-Silva JP, da Silva Santos JF, Abbiss CR, Franchini 
E. Measurement properties and feasibility of repeated 
sprint ability test: a systematic review. Strength Cond J. 
2019;41(6):41–61.
 52. Samozino P, Rabita G, Dorel S, Slawinski J, Peyrot N, Saez de 
Villarreal E, et al. A simple method for measuring power, force, 
velocity properties, and mechanical effectiveness in sprint run-
ning. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2016;26(6):648–58.
1633
Acute Demands of Repeated-Sprint Training
 53. Morin J-B, Dalleau G, Kyröläinen H, Jeannin T, Belli A. A sim-
ple method for measuring stiffness during running. J Appl Bio-
mech. 2005;21(2):167–80.
 54. Brocherie F, Millet GP, Girard O. Neuro-mechanical and meta-
bolic adjustments to the repeated anaerobic sprint test in profes-
sional football players. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2015;115(5):891–903.
 55. McKay AK, Stellingwerff T, Smith ES, Martin DT, Mujika I, 
Goosey-Tolfrey VL, et al. Defining training and performance 
caliber: a participant classification framework. Int J Sports Phys-
iol Perform. 2022;1(aop):1–15.
 56. Borg G. The Borg CR Scales Folder. Methods for measuring 
intensity of experience. Hasselby: Stockholm University; 2010.
 57. Akenhead R, Marques JB, Paul DJ. Accelerometer load: a new 
way to measure fatigue during repeated sprint training? Sci Med 
Footb. 2017;1(2):151–6.
 58. Selmi MA, Haj Sassi R, Haj Yahmed M, Moalla W, Elloumi M. 
Effect of between-set recovery durations on repeated sprint abil-
ity in young soccer players. Biol Sport. 2016;33(2):165–72.
 59. Buchheit M. Performance and physiological responses to 
repeated-sprint and jump sequences. Eur J Appl Physiol. 
2010;110(5):1007–18.
 60. Buchheit M, Bishop D, Haydar B, Nakamura FY, Ahmaidi S. 
Physiological responses to shuttle repeated-sprint running. Int J 
Sports Med. 2010;31(06):402–9.
 61. Dellal A, Casamichana D, Castellano J, Haddad M, Moalla W, 
Chamari K. Cardiac parasympathetic reactivation in elite soccer 
players during different types of traditional high-intensity train-
ing exercise modes and specific tests: interests and limits. Asian 
J Sports Med. 2015;6(4).
 62. Haugen T, Tonnessen E, Leirstein S, Hem E, Seiler S. Not 
quite so fast: effect of training at 90% sprint speed on maxi-
mal and repeated-sprint ability in soccer players. J Sports Sci. 
2014;32(20):1979–86.
 63. Till K, Scantlebury S, Jones B. Anthropometric and physical 
qualities of elite male youth rugby league players. Sports Med. 
2017;47(11):2171–86.
 64. Downs SH, Black N. The feasibility of creating a checklist for the 
assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and 
non-randomised studies of health care interventions. J Epidemiol 
Community Health. 1998;52(6):377–84.
 65. Cheung MW-L. A guide to conducting a meta-analysis with non-
independent effect sizes. Neuropsychol Rev. 2019;29(4):387–96.
 66. Borenstein M, Hedges LV, Higgins JP, Rothstein HR. A basic 
introduction to fixed-effect and random-effects models for meta-
analysis. Res Synth. 2010;1(2):97–111.
 67. Viechtbauer W. Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor 
package. J Stat Softw. 2010;36(3):1–48.
 68. Pustejovsky J. clubSandwich: Cluster-Robust (Sandwich) Vari-
ance Estimators with Small-Sample Corrections. R package 
version 0.5.3 2021. https:// CRAN.R- proje ct. org/ packa ge= clubS 
andwi ch.
 69. Riley RD. Multivariate meta-analysis: the effect of ignor-
ing within-study correlation. J R Stat Soc A Stat Soc. 
2009;172(4):789–811.
 70. IntHout J, Ioannidis JP, Rovers MM, Goeman JJ. Plea for rou-
tinely presenting prediction intervals in meta-analysis. BMJ 
Open. 2016;6(7): e010247.
 71. Higgins JP. Commentary: Heterogeneity in meta-analysis 
should be expected and appropriately quantified. Int J Epide-
miol. 2008;37(5):1158–60.
 72. Viechtbauer W. Confidence intervals for the amount of hetero-
geneity in meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2007;26(1):37–52.
 73. Higgins JP, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, 
et al. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interven-
tions. New York: Wiley; 2019.
 74. Greenland S. Valid p-values behave exactly as they should: 
some misleading criticisms of p-values and their resolution 
with s-values. Am Stat. 2019;73(sup1):106–14.
 75. Buchheit M. Monitoring training status with HR measures: do 
all roads lead to Rome? Front Physiol. 2014;5:73.
 76. McLaren SJ. The application of differential ratings of perceived 
exertion to training monitoring in team sports [Doctoral The-
sis]. Middlesbrough: Teesside University; 2018.
 77. Haugen T, Buchheit M. Sprint running performance monitor-
ing: methodological and practical considerations. Sports Med. 
2016;46(5):641–56.
 78. Lakomy J, Haydon DT. The effects of enforced, rapid decelera-
tion on performance in a multiple sprint test. J Strength Cond 
Res. 2004;18(3):579–83.
 79. Buchheit M, Laursen PB. High-intensity interval train-
ing, solutions to the programming puzzle. Sports Med. 
2013;43(10):927–54.
 80. Harrison PW, Johnston RD. Relationship between training 
load, fitness, and injury over an Australian rules football pre-
season. J Strength Cond Res. 2017;31(10):2686–93.
 81. Malone JJ, Di Michele R, Morgans R, Burgess D, Morton JP, 
Drust B. Seasonal training-load quantification in elite English 
premier league soccer players. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 
2015;10:489–97.
 82. Dalton-Barron NE, McLaren SJ, Black CJ, Gray M, Jones B, 
Roe G. Identifying contextual influences on training load: an 
example in professional Rugby Union. J Strength Cond Res. 
2021;35(2):503–11.
 83. Gharbi Z, Dardouri W, Haj-Sassi R, Castagna C, Chamari K, 
Souissi N. Effect of the number of sprint repetitions on the 
variation of blood lactate concentration in repeated sprint ses-
sions. Biol Sport. 2014;31(2):151.
 84. Medbø J, Burgers S. Effect of training on the anaerobic capac-
ity. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1990;22(4):501–7.
 85. Chiu LZ, Barnes JL. The fitness-fatigue model revisited: impli-
cations for planning short-and long-term training. J Strength 
Cond Res. 2003;25(6):42–51.
 86. Dupont G, Millet GP, Guinhouya C, Berthoin S. Relationship 
between oxygen uptake kinetics and performance in repeated 
running sprints. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2005;95(1):27–34.
 87. Tønnessen E, Hem E, Leirstein S, Haugen T, Seiler S. Maximal 
aerobic power characteristics of male professional soccer play-
ers, 1989–2012. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2013;8(3):323–9.
 88. Haugen TA, Tønnessen E, Hem E, Leirstein S, Seiler S. VO2max 
characteristics of elite female soccer players, 1989–2007. Int J 
Sports Physiol Perform. 2014;9(3):515–21.
 89. Gabbett TJ, Jenkins DG, Abernethy B. Relationships between 
physiological, anthropometric, and skill qualities and playing 
performance in professional rugby league players. J Sports Sci. 
2011;29(15):1655–64.
 90. Higham DG, Pyne DB, Anson JM, Eddy A. Physiological, 
anthropometric, and performance characteristics of rugby 
sevens players. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2013;8(1):19–27.
 91. Midgley AW, McNaughton LR, Wilkinson M. Is there an optimal 
training intensity for enhancing the maximal oxygen uptake of 
distance runners? Sports Med. 2006;36(2):117–32.
 92. Laursen PB, Jenkins DG. The scientific basis for high-intensity 
interval training. Sports Med. 2002;32(1):53–73.
 93. Midgley A, Mc NL. Time at or near VO2max during continuous 
and intermittent running: a review with special reference to con-
siderations for the optimisation of training protocols to elicit the 
longest time at or near VO^ sub 2max. J Sports Med Phys Fit. 
2006;46(1):1.
 94. Swain DP, Abernathy KS, Smith CS, Lee SJ, Bunn SA. Target 
heart rates for the development of cardiorespiratory fitness. Med 
Sci Sports Exerc. 1994;26(1):112–6.
1634
 
F. Thurlow et al.
 95. Aguiar M, Abrantes C, Maçãs V, Leite N, Sampaio J, Ibáñez S. 
Effects of intermittent or continuous training on speed, jump and 
repeated-sprint ability in semi-professional soccer players. Open 
Sports Sci J. 2008;1(1).
 96. Almansba R, Boucher VG, Parent A-A, Comtois AS. Repeated 
linear and quadrangular sprint as a function of anaerobic power. 
J Strength Cond Res. 2019;33(8):2177–84.
 97. Brahim MB, Mohamed A, Shalfawi SA. The evaluation of soccer 
players performance on different repeated sprints tests: training 
and testing implications. Kinesiol Slov. 2016;22(2).
 98. Brini S, Ben Abderrahman A, Boullosa D, Hackney AC, Zagatto 
AM, Castagna C, et al. Effects of a 12-week change-of-direction 
sprints training program on selected physical and physiological 
parameters in professional basketball male players. Int J Environ 
Res Public Health. 2020;17(21):8214.
 99. Buchheit M, Haydar B, Ahmaidi S. Repeated sprints 
with directional changes: do angles matter? J Sports Sci. 
2012;30(6):555–62.
 100. Dellal A, Wong DP. Repeated sprint and change-of-direction 
abilities in soccer players: effects of age group. J Strength Cond 
Res. 2013;27(9):2504–8.
 101. Gibson N, Currie J, Johnston R, Hill J. Relationship between 
measures of aerobic fitness, speed and repeated sprint ability in 
full and part time youth soccer players. J Sports Med Phys Fit. 
2013;53(1):9–16.
 102. Gonzalo-Skok O, Tous-Fajardo J, Arjol-Serrano JL, Suarez-
Arrones L, Casajús JA, Mendez-Villanueva A. Improve-
ment of repeated-sprint ability and horizontal-jumping per-
formance in elite young basketball players with low-volume 
repeated-maximal-power training. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 
2016;11(4):464–73.
 103. Perroni F, Corvino M, Cignitti L, Minganti C. RSA response to 
preseason training in semiprofessional soccer players. Sport Sci 
Health. 2013;9(2):59–64.
 104. Ruscello B, Tozzo N, Briotti G, Padua E, Ponzetti F, D’Ottavio S. 
Influence of the number of trials and the exercise to rest ratio in 
repeated sprint ability, with changes of direction and orientation. 
J Strength Cond Res. 2013;27(7):1904–19.
 105. Suarez-Arrones L, Tous-Fajardo J, Núñez J, Gonzalo-Skok O, 
Gálvez J, Mendez-Villanueva A. Concurrent repeated-sprint and 
resistance training with superimposed vibrations in rugby play-
ers. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2014;9(4):667–73.
 106. Zagatto AM, Ardigò LP, Barbieri FA, Milioni F, Iacono AD, 
Camargo BH, et al. Performance and metabolic demand of a 
new repeated-sprint ability test in basketball players: does the 
number of changes of direction matter? J Strength Cond Res. 
2017;31(9):2438–46.
 107. Zagatto AM, Claus GM, Dutra YM, de Poli RA, Lopes VH, 
Goodall S, et al. Drop jumps versus sled towing and their effects 
on repeated sprint ability in young basketball players. BMC 
Sports Sci Med Rehabil. 2022;14(1):1–11.
 108. Blasco-Lafarga C, Donfrancesco G, Montoya-Vieco A, Cordel-
lat A, Monteagudo P, Roldán A, et al. Quantifying performance 
impairment, specificity and fatigue in young soccer profession-
als: UirFide Soccer test vs. Bangsbo test. Gazz Med Ital Arch Sci 
Med. 2020;179(7–8):437–47.
 109. Kaplan T. Examination of repeated sprinting ability and fatigue 
index of soccer players according to their positions. J Strength 
Cond Res. 2010;24(6):1495–501.
 110. Joo CH. The effects of short-term detraining on exercise perfor-
mance in soccer players. J Exerc Rehabil. 2016;12(1):54–9.
 111. Turki O, Dhahbi W, Gueid S, Hmaied S, Souaifi M, Khalifa 
R. Dynamic warm-up with a weighted vest: improvement of 
repeated change-of-direction performance in young male soccer 
players. Int J Sport Physiol Perform. 2020;15(2):196–203.
 112. Brughelli M, Cronin J, Levin G, Chaouachi A. Under-
standing change of direction ability in sport. Sports Med. 
2008;38(12):1045–63.
 113. Sheppard JM, Young WB. Agility literature review: classifica-
tions, training and testing. J Sports Sci. 2006;24(9):919–32.
 114. Padulo J, Laffaye G, Haddad M, Chaouachi A, Attene G, Migli-
accio GM, et al. Repeated sprint ability in young basketball 
players: one vs. two changes of direction (Part 1). J Sports Sci. 
2015;33(14):1480–92.
 115. Attene G, Nikolaidis PT, Bragazzi NL, Dello Iacono A, Pizzolato 
F, Zagatto AM, et al. Repeated sprint ability in young basketball 
players (Part 2): the chronic effects of multidirection and of one 
change of direction are comparable in terms of physiological and 
performance responses. Front Physiol. 2016;7:262.
 116. Dal Pupo J, Detanico D, Carminatti LJ, Santos SG. Physiological 
and neuromuscular responses in the shuttle and straight line-
repeated sprint running. Apunts Med Esport. 2013;48(178):43–8.
 117. Sánchez-Sánchez J, García-Unanue J, Jiménez-Reyes P, Gallardo 
A, Burillo P, Felipe JL, et al. Influence of the mechanical proper-
ties of third-generation artificial turf systems on soccer players’ 
physiological and physical performance and their perceptions. 
PLoS One. 2014;9(10): e111368.
 118. Abt G, Siegler JC, Akubat I, Castagna C. The effects of a con-
stant sprint-to-rest ratio and recovery mode on repeated sprint 
performance. J Strength Cond Res. 2011;25(6):1695–702.
 119. Figueira B, Gonçalves B, Abade E, Paulauskas R, Masiulis N, 
Kamarauskas P, et al. Repeated sprint ability in elite basketball 
players: the effects of 10× 30 m vs. 20× 15 m exercise protocols 
on physiological variables and sprint performance. J Hum Kinet. 
2021;77(1):181–9.
 120. Iaia FM, Fiorenza M, Perri E, Alberti G, Millet GP, Bangsbo J. 
The effect of two speed endurance training regimes on perfor-
mance of soccer players. PLoS One. 2015;10(9): e0138096.
 121. Little T, Williams AG. Effects of sprint duration and exercise: 
rest ratio on repeated sprint performance and physiological 
responses in professional soccer players. J Strength Cond Res. 
2007;21(2):646–8.
 122. Paulauskas R, Kamarauskas P, Nekriošius R, Bigwood NM. 
Physical and physiological response to different modes of 
repeated sprint exercises in basketball players. J Hum Kinet. 
2020;72(1):91–9.
 123. Russell M, Birch J, Love T, Cook CJ, Bracken RM, Taylor T, 
et al. The effects of a single whole-body cryotherapy exposure on 
physiological, performance, and perceptual responses of profes-
sional academy soccer players after repeated sprint exercise. J 
Strength Cond Res. 2017;31(2):415–21.
 124. Eliakim M, Meckel Y, Gotlieb R, Nemet D, Eliakim A. Motiva-
tional music and repeated sprint ability in junior basketball play-
ers. Acta Kinesiologiae Universitatis Tartuensis. 2012;18:29–38.
 125. Ulupınar S, Hazır T, Kinİşler A. The contribution of energy sys-
tems in repeated-sprint protocols: The effect of distance, rest, and 
repetition. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2023;94:173–9.
 126. Ulupınar S, Özbay S, Gençoğlu C, Franchini E, Kishalı NF, 
İnce İ. Effects of sprint distance and repetition number on 
energy system contributions in soccer players. J Exerc Sci Fit. 
2021;19(3):182–8.
 127. Costello SE, O’Neill BV, Howatson G, van Someren K, 
Haskell-Ramsay CF. Detrimental effects on executive func-
tion and mood following consecutive days of repeated high-
intensity sprint interval exercise in trained male sports players. 
J Sports Sci. 2022;40:783–96.
 128. Haugen T, Tønnessen E, Øksenholt Ø, Haugen FL, Paulsen 
G, Enoksen E, et al. Sprint conditioning of junior soccer play-
ers: effects of training intensity and technique supervision. 
PLoS One. 2015;10(3): e0121827.
1635
Acute Demands of Repeated-Sprint Training
 129. Spencer M, Lawrence S, Rechichi C, Bishop D, Dawson B, 
Goodman C. Time–motion analysis of elite field hockey, with 
special reference to repeated-sprint activity. J Sports Sci. 
2004;22(9):843–50.
 130. Dawson B. Repeated-sprint ability: where are we? Int J Sports 
Physiol Perform. 2012;7(3):285–9.
 131. Dent JR, Edge JA, Hawke E, McMahon C, Mündel T. Sex dif-
ferences in acute translational repressor 4E-BP1 activity and 
sprint performance in response to repeated-sprint exercise in 
team sport athletes. J Sci Med Sport. 2015;18(6):730–6.
 132. Vollaard N, Metcalfe R, Williams S. Effect of number of 
sprints in a SIT session on change in VO2max: a meta-analysis. 
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2017;49(6):1147–56.
 133. Mendez-Villanueva A, Hamer P, Bishop D. Fatigue in 
repeated-sprint exercise is related to muscle power factors 
and reduced neuromuscular activity. Eur J Appl Physiol. 
2008;103(4):411–9.
 134. Sandford GN, Laursen PB, Buchheit M. Anaerobic speed/power 
reserve and sport performance: scientific basis, current applica-
tions and future directions. Sports Med. 2021;51(10):2017–28.
 135. Julio UF, Panissa VL, Paludo AC, Alves ED, Campos FA, Fran-
chini E. Use of the anaerobic speed reserve to normalize the 
prescription of high-intensity interval exercise intensity. Eur J 
Sport Sci. 2020;20(2):166–73.
 136. Spencer M, Bishop D, Dawson B, Goodman C. Physiological and 
metabolic responses of repeated-sprint activities. Sports Med. 
2005;35(12):1025–44.
 137. Jiménez-Reyes P, Garcia-Ramos A, Párraga-Montilla JA, 
Morcillo-Losa JA, Cuadrado-Peñafiel V, Castaño-Zambudio A, 
et al. Seasonal changes in the sprint acceleration force-veloc-
ity profile of elite male soccer players. J Strength Cond Res. 
2022;36(1):70–4.
 138. Jiménez-Reyes P, García-Ramos A, Cuadrado-Peñafiel V, 
Párraga-Montilla JA, Morcillo-Losa JA, Samozino P, et al. Dif-
ferences in sprint mechanical force–velocity profile between 
trained soccer and futsal players. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 
2019;14(4):478–85.
 139. Mancha-Triguero D, García-Rubio J, Gamonales JM, Ibáñez SJ. 
Strength and speed profiles based on age and sex differences 
in young basketball players. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 
2021;18(2):643.
 140. Izquierdo M, Ibañez J, González-Badillo JJ, Gorostiaga 
EM. Effects of creatine supplementation on muscle power, 
endurance, and sprint performance. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 
2002;34(2):332–43.
 141. Broderick V, Uiga L, Driller M. Flotation-restricted environmen-
tal stimulation therapy improves sleep and performance recovery 
in athletes. Perform Enhancement Health. 2019;7(1–2).
 142. Conte D, Favero TG, Lupo C, Francioni FM, Capranica L, Tes-
sitore A. Time-motion analysis of Italian elite women’s basket-
ball games: individual and team analyses. J Strength Cond Res. 
2015;29(1):144–50.
 143. Manchado C, Pers J, Navarro F, Han A, Sung E, Platen P. Time-
motion analysis in women’s team handball: importance of aero-
bic performance. J Hum Sport Exerc. 2013.
 144. Mero A, Komi P, Gregor R. Biomechanics of sprint running. 
Sports Med. 1992;13(6):376–92.
 145. Higashihara A, Nagano Y, Ono T, Fukubayashi T. Differences 
in hamstring activation characteristics between the accelera-
tion and maximum-speed phases of sprinting. J Sports Sci. 
2018;36(12):1313–8.
 146. Timmins RG, Opar DA, Williams MD, Schache AG, Dear NM, 
Shield AJ. Reduced biceps femoris myoelectrical activity influ-
ences eccentric knee flexor weakness after repeat sprint run-
ning. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2014;24(4):e299–305.
 147. Thelen DG, Chumanov ES, Hoerth DM, Best TM, Swanson 
SC, Li L, et al. Hamstring muscle kinematics during treadmill 
sprinting. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2005;37(1):108–14.
 148. Schache AG, Dorn TW, Blanch PD, Brown NA, Pandy MG. 
Mechanics of the human hamstring muscles during sprinting. 
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2012;44(4):647–58.
 149. Girard O, Racinais S, Kelly L, Millet GP, Brocherie F. 
Repeated sprinting on natural grass impairs vertical stiffness 
but does not alter plantar loading in soccer players. Eur J Appl 
Physiol. 2011;111(10):2547–55.
 150. Padulo J, Tabben M, Ardigò L, Ionel M, Popa C, Gevat C, et al. 
Repeated sprint ability related to recovery time in young soccer 
players. Res Sports Med. 2015;23(4):412–23.
 151. Balsom P, Seger J, Sjödin B, Ekblom B. Maximal-intensity 
intermittent exercise: effect of recovery duration. Int J Sports 
Med. 1992;13(07):528–33.
 152. Tabata I, Nishimura K, Kouzaki M, Hirai Y, Ogita F, Miyachi 
M, et al. Effects of moderate-intensity endurance and high-
intensity intermittent training on anaerobic capacity and 
VO2max. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1996;28:1327–30.
 153. Castagna C, Abt G, Manzi V, Annino G, Padua E, D’Ottavio 
S. Effect of recovery mode on repeated sprint ability in young 
basketball players. J Strength Cond Res. 2008;22(3):923–9.
 154. Brini S, Ahmaidi S, Bouassida A. Effects of passive versus 
active recovery at different intensities on repeated sprint per-
formance and testosterone/cortisol ratio in male senior basket-
ball players. Sci Sports. 2020;35(5):e142–7.
 155. Dupont G, Berthoin S. Time spent at a high percentage of max 
for short intermittent runs: active versus passive recovery. Can 
J Appl Physiol. 2004;29(S1):S3–16.
 156. Padulo J, Tabben M, Attene G, Ardigò L, Dhahbi W, Chamari 
K. The impact of jumping during recovery on repeated 
sprint ability in young soccer players. Res Sports Med. 
2015;23(3):240–52.
 157. Buchheit M, Cormie P, Abbiss C, Ahmaidi S, Nosaka KK, 
Laursen P. Muscle deoxygenation during repeated sprint run-
ning: effect of active vs. passive recovery. Int J Sports Med. 
2009;30(06):418–25.
 158. Dupont G, Moalla W, Guinhouya C, Ahmaidi S, Berthoin S. 
Passive versus active recovery during high-intensity intermittent 
exercises. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2004;36(2):302–8.
 159. Austin DJ, Gabbett TJ, Jenkins DJ. Repeated high-intensity 
exercise in a professional rugby league. J Strength Cond Res. 
2011;25(7):1898–904.
 160. Carling C, Le Gall F, Dupont G. Analysis of repeated high-
intensity running performance in professional soccer. J Sports 
Sci. 2012;30(4):325–36.
 161. Sirotic AC, Coutts AJ, Knowles H, Catterick C. A comparison of 
match demands between elite and semi-elite rugby league com-
petition. J Sports Sci. 2009;27(3):203–11.
 162. Beato M, Drust B. Acceleration intensity is an important con-
tributor to the external and internal training load demands of 
repeated sprint exercises in soccer players. Res Sports Med. 
2021;29(1):67–76.
 163. Lockie RG, Davis DL, Birmingham-Babauta SA, Beiley MD, 
Hurley JM, Stage AA, et al. Physiological characteristics of 
incoming freshmen field players in a men’s Division I collegiate 
soccer team. Sports. 2016;4(2):34.
 164. Mujika I, Spencer M, Santisteban J, Goiriena JJ, Bishop D. Age-
related differences in repeated-sprint ability in highly trained 
youth football players. J Sports Sci. 2009;27(14):1581–90.
 165. Rodríguez-Fernández A, Sánchez-Sánchez J, Ramirez-Campillo 
R, Rodríguez-Marroyo JA, Villa Vicente JG, Nakamura FY. 
Effects of short-term in-season break detraining on repeated-
sprint ability and intermittent endurance according to initial per-
formance of soccer player. PLoS One. 2018;13(8): e0201111.
1636
 
F. Thurlow et al.
 166. Jorge G, Garrafoli MT, Abad CCC. Seasonal repeated sprint 
ability with change of direction variations in U17 and U20 elite 
Brazilian soccer players: a comparative study. J Strength Cond 
Res. 2020;34(5):1431–9.
 167. Alizadeh R, Hovanloo F, Safania AM. The relationship between 
aerobic power and repeated sprint ability in young soccer players 
with different levels of VO2 max. J Phys Educ Sport. 2010;27(2).
 168. Campa F, Semprini G, Júdice PB, Messina G, Toselli S. Anthro-
pometry, physical and movement features, and repeated-sprint 
ability in soccer players. Int J Sports Med. 2019;40(02):100–9.
 169. García-Unanue J, Felipe JL, Bishop D, Colino E, Ubago-Guisado 
E, López-Fernández J, et al. Muscular and physical response 
to an agility and repeated sprint tests according to the level of 
competition in futsal players. Front Psychol. 2020;11:3671.
 170. Impellizzeri F, Rampinini E, Castagna C, Bishop D, Bravo DF, 
Tibaudi A, et al. Validity of a repeated-sprint test for football. Int 
J Sports Med. 2008;29(11):899–905.
 171. Ingebrigtsen J, Bendiksen M, Randers MB, Castagna C, Krustrup 
P, Holtermann A. Yo-Yo IR2 testing of elite and sub-elite soc-
cer players: performance, heart rate response and correlations to 
other interval tests. J Sports Sci. 2012;30(13):1337–45.
 172. Keogh JW, Weber CL, Dalton CT. Evaluation of anthropometric, 
physiological, and skill-related tests for talent identification in 
female field hockey. Can J Appl Physiol. 2003;28(3):397–409.
 173. Le Rossignol P, Gabbett TJ, Comerford D, Stanton WR. 
Repeated-sprint ability and team selection in Australian football 
league players. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2014;9(1):161–5.
 174. Rampinini E, Sassi A, Morelli A, Mazzoni S, Fanchini M, Coutts 
AJ. Repeated-sprint ability in professional and amateur soccer 
players. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2009;34(6):1048–54.
 175. Delextrat A, Calleja-González J, Hippocrate A, Clarke ND. 
Effects of sports massage and intermittent cold-water immer-
sion on recovery from matches by basketball players. J Sports 
Sci. 2013;31(1):11–9.
 176. Tounsi M, Jaafar H, Aloui A, Tabka Z, Trabelsi Y. Effect of 
listening to music on repeated-sprint performance and affective 
load in young male and female soccer players. Sport Sci Health. 
2019;15(2):337–42.
 177. Galy O, Zongo P, Chamari K, Chaouachi A, Michalak E, Del-
lal A, et al. Anthropometric and physiological characteristics of 
Melanesian futsal players: a first approach to talent identification 
in Oceania. Biol Sport. 2015;32(2):135.
 178. Krustrup P, Mohr M, Steensberg A, Bencke J, Kjær M, 
Bangsbo J. Muscle and blood metabolites during a soccer game: 
implications for sprint performance. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 
2006;38(6):1165–74.
 179. McMahon JJ, Jones PA, Comfort P. Comment on: “Anthropo-
metric and physical qualities of elite male youth rugby league 
players.” Sports Med. 2017;47(12):2667–8.
 180. AbuMoh’d MF, Abubaker M. Effect of β-alanine supple-
mentation on repeated sprint ability and responses of blood 
lactate and bicarbonate in male soccer players. Sport Mont. 
2020;18(2):83–8. 
 181. Altimari JM, Altimari LR, Bortolotti H, Junior AF, Gabardo 
JM, Buzzachera CF, et al. The relative age effect on anthro-
pometry, body composition, biological maturation and motor 
performance in young Brazilian soccer players. J Hum Kinet. 
2021;77(1):147–57.
 182. Archiza B, Andaku DK, Caruso FCR, Bonjorno JC Jr, Oliveira 
CR, Ricci PA, et al. Effects of inspiratory muscle training in pro-
fessional women football players: a randomized sham-controlled 
trial. J Sports Sci. 2018;36(7):771–80.
 183. Ayarra R, Nakamura FY, Iturricastillo A, Castillo D, Yanci J. 
Differences in physical performance according to the competitive 
level in futsal players. J Hum Kinet. 2018;64:275.
 184. Aziz A, Chia M, Teh K. The relationship between maxi-
mal oxygen uptake and repeated sprint performance indices 
in field hockey and soccer players. J Sports Med Phys Fit. 
2000;40(3):195.
 185. Baldi M, Da Silva JF, Buzachera C, Castagna C, Guglielmo 
LG. Repeated sprint ability in soccer players: associations with 
physiological and neuromuscular factors. J Sports Med Phys Fit. 
2017;57:26–32.
 186. Balsalobre-Fernández C, Tejero-González CM, del Campo-
Vecino J, Bachero-Mena B, Sánchez-Martínez J. Relationships 
among repeated sprint ability, vertical jump performance and 
upper-body strength in professional basketball players. Arch Med 
Deporte. 2014;31(161):148–53.
 187. Beato M, Coratella G, Bianchi M, Costa E, Merlini M. Short-
term repeated-sprint training (straight sprint vs. changes of direc-
tion) in soccer players. J Hum Kinet. 2019;70:183.
 188. Beato M, Bianchi M, Coratella G, Merlini M, Drust B. A sin-
gle session of straight line and change-of-direction sprinting 
per week does not lead to different fitness improvements in elite 
young soccer players. J Strength Cond Res. 2022;36(2):518–24.
 189. Beaven CM, Kilduff LP, Cook CJ. Lower-limb passive heat main-
tenance combined with pre-cooling improves repeated sprint 
ability. Front Physiol. 2018;9:1064.
 190. Binnie MJ, Dawson B, Arnot MA, Pinnington H, Landers G, 
Peeling P. Effect of sand versus grass training surfaces during 
an 8-week pre-season conditioning programme in team sport 
athletes. J Sports Sci. 2014;32(11):1001–12.
 191. Binnie MJ, Dawson B, Pinnington H, Landers G, Peeling P. 
Effect of training surface on acute physiological responses after 
interval training. J Strength Cond Res. 2013;27(4):1047–56.
 192. Binnie MJ, Dawson B, Pinnington H, Landers G, Peeling 
P. Part 2: Effect of training surface on acute physiological 
responses after sport-specific training. J Strength Cond Res. 
2013;27(4):1057–66.
 193. Borges JH, Conceição MS, Vechin FC, Pascoal EHF, Silva RP, 
Borin JP. The effects of resisted sprint vs. plyometric training 
on sprint performance and repeated sprint ability during the 
final weeks of the youth soccer season. Sci Sports. 2016;31(4): 
e101-e5.
 194. Brini S, Marzouki H, Castagna C, Bouassida A. Effects of a 
four-week small-sided game and repeated sprint ability training 
during and after Ramadan on aerobic and anaerobic capacities in 
senior basketball players. Ann Appl Sport Sci. 2018;6(3):7–13.
 195. Brini S, Delextrat A, Bouassida A. Variation in lower limb power 
and three point shot performance following repeated sprints: one 
vs. five changes of direction in male basketball players. J Hum 
Kinet. 2021;77(1):169–79.
 196. Brocherie F, Girard O, Forchino F, Al Haddad H, Dos Santos 
GA, Millet GP. Relationships between anthropometric measures 
and athletic performance, with special reference to repeated-
sprint ability, in the Qatar national soccer team. J Sports Sci. 
2014;32(13):1243–54.
 197. Brocherie F, Millet GP, Hauser A, Steiner T, Rysman J, Wehr-
lin JP, et al. “Live high-train low and high” hypoxic training 
improves team-sport performance. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 
2015;47(10):2140–9.
 198. Buchheit M. Repeated-sprint performance in team sport players: 
associations with measures of aerobic fitness, metabolic control 
and locomotor function. Int J Sports Med. 2012;33(03):230–9.
 199. Campos FDS, Borszcz FK, Flores LJF, Barazetti LK, Teixeira 
AS, Hartmann Nunes RF, et al. HIIT models in addition to train-
ing load and heart rate variability are related with physiological 
and performance adaptations after 10-weeks of training in young 
futsal players. Front Psychol. 2021;12: 636153.
1637
Acute Demands of Repeated-Sprint Training
 200. Campos-Vazquez MA, Romero-Boza S, Toscano-Bendala FJ, 
Leon-Prados JA, Suarez-Arrones LJ, Gonzalez-Jurado JA. Com-
parison of the effect of repeated-sprint training combined with 
two different methods of strength training on young soccer play-
ers. J Strength Cond Res. 2015;29(3):744–51.
 201. Caprino D, Clarke ND, Delextrat A. The effect of an official 
match on repeated sprint ability in junior basketball players. J 
Sports Sci. 2012;30(11):1165–73.
 202. Castagna C, Manzi V, D’ottavio S, Annino G, Padua E, Bishop 
D. Relation between maximal aerobic power and the ability to 
repeat sprints in young basketball players. J Strength Cond Res. 
2007;21(4):1172–6.
 203. Chaouachi A, Manzi V, Wong DP, Chaalali A, Laurencelle L, 
Chamari K, et al. Intermittent endurance and repeated sprint abil-
ity in soccer players. J Strength Cond Res. 2010;24(10):2663–9.
 204. Charlot K, Zongo P, Leicht AS, Hue O, Galy O. Intensity, recov-
ery kinetics and well-being indices are not altered during an offi-
cial FIFA futsal tournament in Oceanian players. J Sports Sci. 
2016;34(4):379–88.
 205. Chen Y-S, Lu W-A, Clemente FM, Bezerra JP, Kuo C-D. 
Increased parasympathetic activity by foot reflexology massage 
after repeated sprint test in collegiate football players: a ran-
domised controlled trial. Sports. 2019;7(11):228.
 206. Corrêa DA, Soares DS, Gonelli PR, Cesar MC, Germano MD, 
Sindorf MA, et al. Effect of 29 weeks of periodized soccer train-
ing on the neuromuscular performance of soccer players under 
20 years of age. J Exerc Physiol Online. 2016;19(4):32–42.
 207. Cuadrado-Peñafiel V, Párraga-Montilla J, Ortega-Becerra MA, 
Jiménez-Reyes P. Repeated sprint ability in professional soccer 
vs. professional futsal players. J Sports Sci. 2014;10(2):89–98.
 208. da Silva JF, Guglielmo LG, Bishop D. Relationship between dif-
ferent measures of aerobic fitness and repeated-sprint ability in 
elite soccer players. J Strength Cond Res. 2010;24(8):2115–21.
 209. Dal Pupo J, Detanico D, Arins FB, Nascimento Salvador PC, 
Guglielmo LGA, dos Santos SG. Repeated sprint ability and 
muscle power levels of the futsal players of U15 and U17 cat-
egories. Rev Bras Cienc Esporte. 2017;39(1):73–8.
 210. Daneshfar A, Gahreman DE, Koozehchian MS, Amani 
Shalamzari S, Hassanzadeh Sablouei M, Rosemann T, et al. 
Multi directional repeated sprint is a valid and reliable test for 
assessment of junior handball players. Front Physiol. 2018;9:317.
 211. Dardouri W, Selmi MA, Sassi RH, Gharbi Z, Rebhi A, Yahmed 
MH, et  al. Relationship between repeated sprint perfor-
mance and both aerobic and anaerobic fitness. J Hum Kinet. 
2014;40(1):139–48.
 212. de Andrade VL, Palucci Vieira LH, Kalva-Filho CA, Santiago 
PRP. Critical points of performance in repeated sprint: a kin-
ematic approach. Sci Sports. 2021.
 213. Delextrat A, Hippocrate A, Leddington-Wright S, Clarke ND. 
Including stretches to a massage routine improves recovery 
from official matches in basketball players. J Strength Cond Res. 
2014;28(3):716–27.
 214. Delextrat A, Kraiem S. Heart-rate responses by playing position 
during ball drills in basketball. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 
2013;8(4):410–8.
 215. Donghi F, Rampinini E, Bosio A, Fanchini M, Carlomagno D, 
Maffiuletti NA. Morning priming exercise strategy to enhance 
afternoon performance in young elite soccer players. Int J Sports 
Physiol Perform. 2021;16(3):407–14.
 216. Doyle B, Browne D, Horan D. The relationship of aerobic endur-
ance and linear speed on repeat sprint ability performance in 
female international footballers. Sciences. 2020;8(4):147–53.
 217. Dupont G, McCall A, Prieur F, Millet GP, Berthoin S, Mil-
let GP. Faster oxygen uptake kinetics during recovery is 
related to better repeated sprinting ability. Eur J Appl Physiol. 
2010;110(3):627–34.
 218. Elias GP, Varley MC, Wyckelsma VL, McKenna MJ, Minahan 
CL, Aughey RJ. Effects of water immersion on posttraining 
recovery in Australian footballers. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 
2012;7(4):357–66.
 219. Elias GP, Wyckelsma VL, Varley MC, McKenna MJ, Aughey 
RJ. Effectiveness of water immersion on postmatch recovery 
in elite professional footballers. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 
2013;8(3):243–53.
 220. Eniseler N, Şahan Ç, Özcan I, Dinler K. High-intensity small-
sided games versus repeated sprint training in junior soccer play-
ers. J Hum Kinet. 2017;60:101.
 221. Eryılmaz SK, Kaynak K. Relationship between repeated sprint 
ability and aerobic fitness in college volleyball players. Univers 
J Educ Res. 2019;7(5):1198–204.
 222. Essid S, Cherif M, Chtourou H, Souissi N. Time-of-day effects 
in physical performances and psychological responses in young 
elite male handball players. Biol Rhythm Res. 2021:1–12.
 223. Farjallah MA, Hammouda O, Ben Mahmoud L, Graja A, Ghat-
tassi K, Boudaya M, et al. Melatonin supplementation amelio-
rates oxidative stress, antioxidant status and physical perfor-
mances recovery during a soccer training camp. Biol Rhythm 
Res. 2020;51(3):441–52.
 224. Fornasier-Santos C, Millet GP, Woorons X. Repeated-sprint 
training in hypoxia induced by voluntary hypoventilation 
improves running repeated-sprint ability in rugby players. Eur 
J Sport Sci. 2018;18(4):504–12.
 225. Fort-Vanmeerhaeghe A, Montalvo A, Latinjak A, Unnithan V. 
Physical characteristics of elite adolescent female basketball 
players and their relationship to match performance. J Hum 
Kinet. 2016;53:167.
 226. Fortin J-F, Billaut F. Blood-flow restricted warm-up alters mus-
cle hemodynamics and oxygenation during repeated sprints in 
American football players. Sports (Basel). 2019;7(5).
 227. Freitas TT, Calleja-González J, Alarcón F, Alcaraz PE. Acute 
effects of two different resistance circuit training protocols on 
performance and perceived exertion in semiprofessional basket-
ball players. J Strength Cond Res. 2016;30(2):407–14.
 228. Gabbett TJ. The development of a test of repeated-sprint abil-
ity for elite women’s soccer players. J Strength Cond Res. 
2010;24(5):1191–4.
 229. Gabbett T, Jenkins D, Abernethy B. Relative importance of phys-
iological, anthropometric, and skill qualities to team selection in 
professional rugby league. J Sports Sci. 2011;29(13):1453–61.
 230. Gabbett TJ, Carius J, Mulvey M. Does improved decision-
making ability reduce the physiological demands of game-
based activities in field sport athletes? J Strength Cond Res. 
2008;22(6):2027–35.
 231. Galvin HM, Cooke K, Sumners DP, Mileva KN, Bowtell JL. 
Repeated sprint training in normobaric hypoxia. Br J Sports Med. 
2013;47(Suppl 1):i74–9.
 232. Gantois P, Aidar FJ, De Matos DG, De Souza RF, Da Silva LM, 
De Castro KR, et al. Repeated sprints and the relationship with 
anaerobic and aerobic fitness of basketball athletes. J Phys Educ 
Sport. 2017;17(2):910.
 233. Gantois P, Aidar FJ, Dantas MP, Silva LM, Paes PP, Santana 
EE, et al. Aerobic fitness is associated with improved repeated 
sprints ability of basketball players after six weeks of training 
during preseason. Rev Bras Cineantropometria Desempenho 
Humano. 2018;20:114–24.
 234. Gatterer H, Klarod K, Heinrich D, Schlemmer P, Dilitz S, 
Burtscher M. Effects of a 12-day maximal shuttle-run shock 
microcycle in hypoxia on soccer specific performance and oxi-
dative stress. Appl Physiol. 2015;40(8):842–5.
 235. Gharbi Z, Dardouri W, Haj-Sassi R, Chamari K, Souissi N. 
Aerobic and anaerobic determinants of repeated sprint ability 
in team sports athletes. Biol Sport. 2015;32(3):207.
1638
 
F. Thurlow et al.
 236. Girard O, Millet GP, Thomson A, Brocherie F. Is plantar load-
ing altered during repeated sprints on artificial turf in interna-
tional football players? J Sports Sci Med. 2018;17(3):359.
 237. González-Frutos P, Aguilar-Navarro M, Morencos E, Mallo J, 
Veiga S. Relationships between strength and step frequency 
with fatigue index in repeated sprint ability. Int J Environ Res 
Public Health. 2022;19(1):196.
 238. Goodall S, Charlton K, Howatson G, Thomas K. Neuromuscu-
lar fatigability during repeated-sprint exercise in male athletes. 
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2015;47(3):528–36.
 239. Hamlin MJ. The effect of contrast temperature water ther-
apy on repeated sprint performance. J Sci Med Sport. 
2007;10(6):398–402.
 240. Hamlin MJ, Olsen PD, Marshall HC, Lizamore CA, Elliot 
CA. Hypoxic repeat sprint training improves rugby player’s 
repeated sprint but not endurance performance. Front Physiol. 
2017;8:24.
 241. Hammami M, Gaamouri N, Aloui G, Shephard RJ, Chelly MS. 
Effects of a complex strength-training program on athletic per-
formance of junior female handball players. Int J Sports Physiol 
Perform. 2019;14(2):163–9.
 242. Hermassi S, Schwesig R, Wollny R, Fieseler G, Fernandez-
Fernandez J, Shephard R, et al. Shuttle versus straight repeated-
sprint ability tests and their relationship to anthropometrics and 
explosive muscular performance in elite handball players. J 
Sports Med Phys Fit. 2018;58(11):1625–34.
 243. Hollville E, Le Croller V, Hirasawa Y, Husson R, Rabita G, Bro-
cherie F. Effect of prior fatiguing sport-specific exercise on field 
Hockey passing ability. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2018:1–7.
 244. Ingebrigtsen J, Brochmann M, Castagna C, Bradley PS, 
Ade J, Krustrup P, et al. Relationships between field perfor-
mance tests in high-level soccer players. J Strength Cond Res. 
2014;28(4):942–9.
 245. Jang JH, Joo CH. The effects of residential environment on the 
condition and fitness of soccer players in the summer. J Exerc 
Rehabil. 2020;16(6):522–8.
 246. Jiménez-Reyes P, Cross M, Ross A, Samozino P, Brughelli M, 
Gill N, et al. Changes in mechanical properties of sprinting dur-
ing repeated sprint in elite rugby sevens athletes. Eur J Sport Sci. 
2019;19(5):585–94.
 247. Jorge G, Garrafoli MT, Cal Abad CC. Seasonal repeated sprint 
ability with change of direction variations in U17 and U20 elite 
Brazilian soccer players: a comparative study. J Strength Cond 
Res. 2020;34(5):1431–9.
 248. Kilduff LP, West DJ, Williams N, Cook CJ. The influence of pas-
sive heat maintenance on lower body power output and repeated 
sprint performance in professional rugby league players. J Sci 
Med Sport. 2013;16(5):482–6.
 249. Krakan I, Milanovic L, Belcic I. Effects of plyometric and 
repeated sprint training on physical performance. Sports. 
2020;8(7):91.
 250. Krueger M, Costello JT, Stenzel M, Mester J, Wahl P. The physi-
ological effects of daily cold-water immersion on 5-day tourna-
ment performance in international standard youth field-hockey 
players. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2020;120(1):295–305.
 251. Lapointe J, Paradis-Deschênes P, Woorons X, Lemaître 
F, Billaut F. Impact of hypoventilation training on muscle 
oxygenation, myoelectrical changes, systemic [K+], and 
repeated-sprint ability in basketball players. Front Sports Act. 
2020;2:29.
 252. Lockie RG, Davis DL, Birmingham-Babauta SA, Beiley MD, 
Hurley JM, Stage AA, et al. Physiological characteristics of 
incoming freshmen field players in a men's division I collegiate 
soccer team. Sports (Basel). 2016;4(2).
 253. Lockie RG, Liu TM, Stage AA, Lazar A, Giuliano DV, Hur-
ley JM, et al. Assessing repeated-sprint ability in division 
I collegiate women soccer players. J Strength Cond Res. 
2020;34(7):2015–23.
 254. Lockie RG, Moreno MR, Orjalo AJ, Stage AA, Liu TM, Bir-
mingham-Babauta SA, et al. Repeated-sprint ability in divi-
sion I collegiate male soccer players: positional differences 
and relationships with performance tests. J Strength Cond Res. 
2019;33(5):1362–70.
 255. Lombard WP, Cai X, Lambert MI, Chen X, Mao L. Relation-
ships between physiological characteristics and match demands 
in elite-level male field hockey players. Int J Sports Sci Coach. 
2021.
 256. Marcelino P, Aoki M, Arruda A, Freitas C, Mendez-Villanueva 
A, Moreira A. Does small-sided-games’ court area influence 
metabolic, perceptual, and physical performance parameters 
of young elite basketball players? Biol Sport. 2016;33(1):37.
 257. Matzenbacher F, Pasquarelli BN, Rabelo FN, Dourado AC, 
Durigan JZ, Rossi HG, et al. Adaptations in the physical capac-
ities of U-18 futsal athletes during a competitive season. Rev 
Bras Cineantropometria Desempenho Hum. 2016;18(1):50–61.
 258. McGawley K, Andersson PI. The order of concurrent training 
does not affect soccer-related performance adaptations. Int J 
Sports Med. 2013;34(11):983–90.
 259. Meckel Y, Doron O, Eliakim E, Eliakim A. Seasonal variations 
in physical fitness and performance indices of elite soccer play-
ers. Sports. 2018;6(1):14.
 260. Meckel Y, Gottlieb R, Eliakim A. Repeated sprint tests in 
young basketball players at different game stages. Eur J Appl 
Physiol. 2009;107(3):273.
 261. Meckel Y, Machnai O, Eliakim A. Relationship among repeated 
sprint tests, aerobic fitness, and anaerobic fitness in elite ado-
lescent soccer players. J Strength Cond Res. 2009;23(1):163–9.
 262. Meckel Y, May-rom M, Ekshtien A, Eisenstein T, Nemet D, 
Eliakim A. Relationships among two repeated activity tests 
and aerobic fitness of volleyball players. J Strength Cond Res. 
2015;29(8):2122–7.
 263. Meckel Y, Einy A, Gottlieb R, Eliakim A. Repeated sprint abil-
ity in young soccer players at different game stages. J Strength 
Cond Res. 2014;28(9):2578–84.
 264. Michalsik LB, Madsen K, Aagaard P. Physiological capacity 
and physical testing in male elite team handball. J Sports Med 
Phys Fit. 2015;55(5):415–29.
 265. Mohr M, Draganidis D, Chatzinikolaou A, Barbero-Álvarez JC, 
Castagna C, Douroudos I, et al. Muscle damage, inflammatory, 
immune and performance responses to three football games 
in 1 week in competitive male players. Eur J Appl Physiol. 
2016;116(1):179–93.
 266. Mohr M, Krustrup P. Comparison between two types of anaero-
bic speed endurance training in competitive soccer players. J 
Hum Kinet. 2016;51(1):183–92.
 267. Mohr M, Nybo L, Grantham J, Racinais S. Physiological 
responses and physical performance during football in the heat. 
PLoS One. 2012;7(6).
 268. Moncef C, Said M, Olfa N, Dagbaji G. Influence of morpholog-
ical characteristics on physical and physiological performances 
of Tunisian elite male handball players. Asian J Sports Med. 
2012;3(2):74–80.
 269. Moreira A, Costa EC, Coutts AJ, Nakamura FY, da Silva DA, 
Aoki MS. Cold water immersion did not accelerate recovery after 
a futsal match. Rev Bras Med Esporte. 2015.
 270. Müller CB, da Veiga RS, dos Santos PE, Del Vecchio FB. Acute 
effects of running anaerobic-based sprint test with different loads 
in amateur rugby union players. Sci Sports. 2021;36(1):85–8.
 271. Okuno NM, Tricoli V, Silva SB, Bertuzzi R, Moreira A, Kiss 
MA. Postactivation potentiation on repeated-sprint ability in elite 
handball players. J Strength Cond Res. 2013;27(3):662–8.
1639
Acute Demands of Repeated-Sprint Training
 272. Nakamura F, Soares-Caldeira L, Laursen P, Polito M, Leme L, 
Buchheit M. Cardiac autonomic responses to repeated shuttle 
sprints. Int J Sports Med. 2009;30(11):808–13.
 273. Nascimento PC, Lucas RDD, Pupo JD, Arins FB, Castagna C, 
Guglielmo LGA. Effects of four weeks of repeated sprint training 
on physiological indices in futsal players. Rev Bras Cineantropo-
metria Desempenho Hum. 2015;17(1):91–103.
 274. Nedrehagen ES, Saeterbakken AH. The effects of in-season 
repeated sprint training compared to regular soccer training. J 
Hum Kinet. 2015;49(1):237–44.
 275. Nikolaidis P, Dellal A, Torres-Luque G, Ingebrigtsen J. Deter-
minants of acceleration and maximum speed phase of repeated 
sprint ability in soccer players: a cross-sectional study. Sci 
Sports. 2015;30(1):e7–16.
 276. Padulo J, Ardigo L, Attene G, Cava C, Wong D, Chamari K, et al. 
The effect of slope on repeated sprint ability in young soccer 
players. Res Sports Med. 2016;24(4):320–30.
 277. Padulo J, Di Giminiani R, Ibba G, Zarrouk N, Moalla W, Attene 
G, et al. The acute effect of whole body vibration on repeated 
shuttle-running in young soccer players. Int J Sports Med. 
2014;35(01):49–54.
 278. Petisco C, Ramirez-Campillo R, Hernández D, Gonzalo-Skok 
O, Nakamura FY, Sanchez-Sanchez J. Post-activation potentia-
tion: effects of different conditioning intensities on measures of 
physical fitness in male young professional soccer players. Front 
Physiol. 2019;10(JUN).
 279. Purkhús E, Krustrup P, Mohr M. High-intensity training improves 
exercise performance in elite women volleyball players during a 
competitive season. J Strength Cond Res. 2016;30(11):3066–72.
 280. Pyne DB, Saunders PU, Montgomery PG, Hewitt AJ, Sheehan K. 
Relationships between repeated sprint testing, speed, and endur-
ance. J Strength Cond Res. 2008;22(5):1633–7.
 281. Ramírez-Campillo R, González-Jurado JA, Martínez C, Naka-
mura FY, Peñailillo L, Meylan CMP, et al. Effects of plyometric 
training and creatine supplementation on maximal-intensity exer-
cise and endurance in female soccer players. J Sci Med Sport. 
2016;19(8):682–7.
 282. Rampinini E, Bishop D, Marcora SM, Ferrari Bravo D, Sassi 
R, Impellizzeri FM. Validity of simple field tests as indicators 
of match-related physical performance in top-level professional 
soccer players. Int J Sports Med. 2007;28(3):228–35.
 283. Rey E, Padrón-Cabo A, Fernández-Penedo D. Effects of sprint 
training with and without weighted vest on speed and repeated 
sprint ability in male soccer players. J Strength Cond Res. 
2017;31(10):2659–66.
 284. Rodríguez-Fernández A, Rodríguez-Marroyo J, Casamichana 
D, Villa J. Effects of 5-week pre-season small-sided-game-
based training on repeat sprint ability. J Sports Med Phys Fit. 
2016;57(5):529–36.
 285. Røksund OD, Kristoffersen M, Bogen BE, Wisnes A, Engeseth 
MS, Nilsen AK, et al. Higher drop in speed during a repeated 
sprint test in soccer players reporting former hamstring strain 
injury. Front Physiol. 2017;8.
 286. Ruscello B, Esposito M, Partipilo F, Di Cicco D, Filetti C, 
Pantanella L, et al. Exercise-to-rest ratios in repeated sprint 
ability training in women’s soccer. J Sports Med Phys Fit. 
2017;58(12):1790–9.
 287. Salleh OM, Nadzalan AM, Mohamad NI, Rahmat A. 
Repeated sprint ability depending on the level of condition 
among university soccer players. Int J Acad Res Bus Soc Sci. 
2017;7(6):506–14.
 288. Sánchez-Sánchez J, García-Unanue J, Hernando E, López-
Fernández J, Colino E, León-Jiménez M, et al. Repeated sprint 
ability and muscular responses according to the age category in 
elite youth soccer players. Front Physiol. 2019;10.
 289. Sanchez-Sanchez J, Rodriguez A, Petisco C, Ramirez-Campillo 
R, Martínez C, Nakamura FY. Effects of different post-activa-
tion potentiation warm-ups on repeated sprint ability in soc-
cer players from different competitive levels. J Hum Kinet. 
2018;61(1):189–97.
 290. Sanders GJ, Turner Z, Boos B, Peacock CA, Peveler W, Lip-
ping A. Aerobic capacity is related to repeated sprint abil-
ity with sprint distances less than 40 meters. Int J Exerc Sci. 
2017;10(2):197.
 291. Scanlan AT, Madueno MC. Passive recovery promotes superior 
performance and reduced physiological stress across different 
phases of short-distance repeated sprints. J Strength Cond Res. 
2016;30(9):2540–9.
 292. Scanlan AT, Madueno MC, Guy JH, Giamarelos K, Spiteri T, 
Dalbo VJ. Measuring decrement in change-of-direction speed 
across repeated sprints in basketball: novel vs. traditional 
approaches. J Strength Cond Res. 2021;35(3):841–5.
 293. Selmi W, Rebai H, Chtara M, Naceur A, Sahli S. Self-confidence 
and affect responses to short-term sprint interval training. Physiol 
Behav. 2018;188:42–7.
 294. Shalfawi SAI, Enoksen E, Tønnessen E. The relationship between 
measures of sprinting, aerobic fitness, and lower body strength 
and power in well-trained female soccer players. Int J Appl 
Sports Sci. 2014;26(1):18–25.
 295. Shalfawi SA, Ingebrigtsen J, Dillern T, Tønnessen E, Delp TK, 
Enoksen E. The effect of 40 m repeated sprint training on physi-
cal performance in young elite male soccer players. Serb J Sports 
Sci. 2012;6(3):111–6.
 296. Shalfawi SA, Young M, Tønnessen E, Haugen TA, Enoksen E. 
The effect of repeated agility training vs. repeated sprint training 
on elite female soccer players' physical performance. Kinesiol 
Slov. 2013;19(3).
 297. Silva RLC, Hall E, Maior AS. Inspiratory muscle training 
improves performance of a repeated sprints ability test in profes-
sional soccer players. J Bodywork Mov Ther. 2019;23(3):452–5.
 298. Soares-Caldeira LF, de Souza EA, de Freitas VH, de Moraes SM, 
Leicht AS, Nakamura FY. Effects of additional repeated sprint 
training during preseason on performance, heart rate variability, 
and stress symptoms in futsal players: a randomized controlled 
trial. J Strength Cond Res. 2014;28(10):2815–26.
 299. Spineti J, Figueiredo T, Assis M, Miranda H, Simão R. Compari-
son between traditional strength training and complex contrast 
training on repeated sprint ability and muscle architecture in elite 
soccer players. J Sports Med Phys Fit. 2015;56(11):1269–78.
 300. Stojanovic M, Ostojic S, Calleja-González J, Milosevic Z, Mikic 
M. Correlation between explosive strength, aerobic power and 
repeated sprint ability in elite basketball players. J Sports Med 
Phys Fit. 2012;52(4):375.
 301. Teixeira AS, Arins FB, De Lucas RD, Carminatti LJ, Dittrich N, 
Nakamura FY, et al. Comparative effects of two interval shuttle-
run training modes on physiological and performance adapta-
tions in female professional futsal players. J Strength Cond Res. 
2019;33(5):1416–28.
 302. Thomassen M, Christensen PM, Gunnarsson TP, Nybo L, 
Bangsbo J. Effect of 2-wk intensified training and inactivity on 
muscle Na+–K+ pump expression, phospholemman (FXYD1) 
phosphorylation, and performance in soccer players. J Appl 
Physiol. 2010;108(4):898–905.
 303. Tønnessen E, Shalfawi SA, Haugen T, Enoksen E. The effect 
of 40-m repeated sprint training on maximum sprinting speed, 
repeated sprint speed endurance, vertical jump, and aerobic 
capacity in young elite male soccer players. J Strength Cond 
Res. 2011;25(9):2364–70.
 304. Torreblanca-Martinez V, Nevado-Garrosa F, Otero-Saborido 
FM, Gonzalez-Jurado JA. Effects of fatigue induced by 
1640
 
F. Thurlow et al.
repeated-sprint on kicking accuracy and velocity in female soc-
cer players. PLoS One. 2020;15(1).
 305. Trecroci A, Porcelli S, Perri E, Pedrali M, Rasica L, Alberti G, 
et al. Effects of different training interventions on the recovery of 
physical and neuromuscular performance after a soccer match. J 
Strength Cond Res. 2020;34(8):2189–96.
 306. van den Tillaar R. Comparison of step-by-step kinematics in 
repeated 30-m sprints in female soccer players. J Strength Cond 
Res. 2018;32(7):1923–8.
 307. Vasquez-Bonilla AA, Camacho-Cardeñosa A, Timón R, Mar-
tínez-Guardado I, Camacho-Cardeñosa M, Olcina G. Muscle 
oxygen desaturation and re-saturation capacity limits in repeated 
sprint ability performance in women soccer players: a new physi-
ological interpretation. Int J Environ Res. 2021;18(7):3484.
 308. Wadley G, Le Rossignol P. The relationship between repeated 
sprint ability and the aerobic and anaerobic energy systems. J 
Sci Med Sport. 1998;1(2):100–10.
 309. West DJ, Russell M, Bracken RM, Cook CJ, Giroud T, Kilduff 
LP. Post-warmup strategies to maintain body temperature and 
physical performance in professional rugby union players. J 
Sports Sci. 2016;34(2):110–5.
 310. Yanci J, Castillo D, Iturricastillo A, Ayarra R, Nakamura FY. 
Effects of two different volume-equated weekly distributed short-
term plyometric training programs on futsal players’ physical 
performance. J Strength Cond Res. 2017;31(7):1787–94.
 311. Zagatto AM, Dutra YM, Claus G, de Sousa ME, de Poli RAB, 
Brisola GMP, et al. Drop jumps improve repeated sprint abil-
ity performances in professional basketball players. Biol Sport. 
2021;38(4):59–66.
 312. Rampinini E, Bishop D, Marcora S, Bravo DF, Sassi R, Impel-
lizzeri F. Validity of simple field tests as indicators of match-
related physical performance in top-level professional soccer 
players. Int J Sports Med. 2007;28(03):228–35.
Authors and Affiliations
Fraser Thurlow1,3  · Jonathon Weakley1,2,3  · Andrew D. Townshend1  · Ryan G. Timmins1,3  · 
Matthew Morrison1,3  · Shaun J. McLaren4,5 
 * Fraser Thurlow 
 
fraser.thurlow@acu.edu.au
1 
School of Behavioural and Health Sciences, Australian 
Catholic University, Brisbane, Australia
2 
Carnegie Applied Rugby Research (CARR) Centre, Carnegie 
School of Sport, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, UK
3 
Sports Performance, Recovery, Injury and New Technologies 
(SPRINT) Research Centre, Australian Catholic University, 
Brisbane, Australia
4 
Newcastle Falcons Rugby Club, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK
5 
Institute of Sport, Manchester Metropolitan University, 
Manchester, UK

The Acute Demands of Repeated-Sprint Training on Physiological, Neuromuscular, Perceptual and Performance Outcomes in Team Sport Athletes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Thurlow, Fraser,Weakley, Jonathon,Townshend, Andrew D,Timmins, Ryan G,Morrison, Matthew,McLaren, Shaun J