It’s pretty well documented that regular aerobic exercise can result in an increase in resting HRV. Generally, you can expect no change or even a slight increase in HRV the day following low to moderate intensity aerobic exercise. However, with higher intensity training, HRV can take up to 48-72 hours to return to baseline, depending on intensity, duration, training status, fitness level, age, gender, etc. (Stanley et al. 2014). I’ve seen this numerous times with my own data where HRV decreases significantly 24 hours following interval sessions (particularly when they are not performed regularly) and increase beyond baseline by 48 hours.

Because low-moderate aerobic work tends to have an acute stimulatory effect of parasympathetic activity, it has been suggested that this would be useful as active recovery following high intensity sessions.

“because (at least) autonomic supercompensation following low-intensity training may occur within 24 h and since cardiac parasympathetic reactivation is delayed by the build-up of metabolites, inclusion of low intensity training subsequent to a high-intensity session may accelerate metabolite breakdown [88]. Athletes who train twice daily may also benefit from the accelerated recovery (metabolic recovery, as reflected by autonomic recovery) afforded by a low-intensity training session” (Stanley et el. 2013)

I recently included moderate intensity aerobic work on off days (approx.10 mins each on treadmill, cycle and rower for a total of 30 mins) and following my training sessions (10-12 mins on cycle) over about a three week period. Previous to this, very little aerobic work was being done, at least not consistently. During this time I lifted on Mon-Tue-Thurs-Fri each week. Below is my HRV data (lnRMSSDx20, standing) that includes a few weeks prior to the inclusion of regular aerobic work as well as the few weeks that followed.

 Next, I’ve included the weekly mean HRV and %CV (coefficient of variation) values.

I started performing the aerobic work midway through week 3 and continued until week 6. The trends both clearly show an increase in HRV during this time. We also see quite a large change in %CV with the regular aerobic work. In the weeks before and following the aerobic work, there are much bigger day to day changes in HRV which is quite typical for me. The inclusion of regular moderate aerobic work attenuated the daily changes I’d typically see following heavy training sessions. Clearly the post-workout aerobic work and active recovery work on off days was effective at promoting recovery. However,it’s important to clarify that HRV parameters are reflective of cardiovascular-autonomic activity, which does not necessarily include neuromuscular ability, CNS potential, etc.

“changes in cardiac parasympathetic activity are useful for monitoring aspects of recovery that are dependent on cardiovascular function. By contrast, changes in cardiac parasympathetic activity are less useful for monitoring other aspects of recovery such as restoration of muscle and liver glycogen, or repair of damaged muscle tissue” (Stanley et al. 2013)

Therefore, the lack of day to day changes in my HRV following heavy resistance training workouts does not imply that I was fully recovered within 24 hours and could repeat performances (e.g., heavy squats), only that that particular system was recovered. Thus, for strength athletes in particular, HRV is only one marker to consider when assessing daily recovery status. More work needs to be done in this area to determine how useful HRV monitoring is in this population and how it can be used effectively.

This data also shows how interpretation of a trend is context dependent, as mean and %CV values are affected by exercise mode and intensity. Thus, if working with team sport athletes, we may expect larger fluctuation and a lower mean when less aerobic exercise is prescribed and vice versa. Even endurance athletes will experience similar HRV changes when preparing for competition as the amount of high intensity/interval training increases and low-moderate intensity/steady state work decreases. This is often characterized with a bell-shaped HRV trend (example below).

The above data is taken from a case study we did of a collegiate endurance athlete over his competitive season (will be in a future edition of JASC). There is clearly a progressive increase in HRV up to a peak, at which point there is a progressive decrease. This is likely a result of more high intensity training and lower volumes of moderate/steady state  work as the athletes prepares to peak, further supporting the need to assess HRV changes in context to training phase, goal, structure, etc. (Buchheit,2014).

Changes in HRV are always context dependent. Decreases in the trend are not always associated with fatigue, nor are increases always associated with higher “readiness”. Nothing is ever as black and white as we’d like it to be. Additional reference to training load, psychometrics and performance will help with interpretation and if necessary intervention.

Refs:

Buchheit, M. (2014). Monitoring training status with HR measures: do all roads lead to Rome?. Frontiers in Physiology, 5.

Stanley, J., Peake, J. M., & Buchheit, M. (2013). Cardiac parasympathetic reactivation following exercise: implications for training prescription. Sports Medicine, 43(12), 1259-1277.