•  
  •  
 

Abstract

International Journal of Exercise Science 12(2): 714-725, 2019. Heart rate recovery (HRR) and blood pressure recovery (BPR) from exercise are both important indicators of health and fitness and are strongly associated with cardiovascular disease. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of a slow-breathing technique, upright passive recovery (PASS), and active recovery (ACT) on HRR and BPR from exercise. Nine moderately trained, college-aged (20.22 ± 0.97 yrs) female participants cycled three times on an ergometer for 15 mins at 70% of their heart rate maximum (HRmax), each of which was followed by one of three 5 min recovery interventions with heart rate (HR) and blood pressure (BP) objectively measured. Each participant completed all three recovery protocols. One recovery protocol consisted of breathing at a rate of 6 breaths per minute (BRE), another involved PASS and the third was ACT at 60 RPM and 25 W. A repeated measures ANOVA revealed there was a significant effect of protocol (p= 0.00, hp2= 0.67) with HRR. BRE resulted in the fastest HRR of 69 ± 9.31 bpm (40.12%) at the end of the 5 min recovery compared to 63 ± 10.60 bpm (36.57%) and 47 ± 12.54 bpm (27.34%) for PASS and ACT, respectively. A second repeated measures ANOVA indicated there was no effect of protocol (P = 0.43), nor was there a significant interaction with time (p= 0.68), for BPR. The results indicated that BRE increased HRR after exercise more rapidly than PASS or ACT with no influence on BPR. These findings lead to future research needed to explore different breathing protocols following exercise in at-risk populations, such as individuals with cardiovascular disease.

Download

Share

COinS