IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0336615.html

Box breathing or six breaths per minute: Which strategy improves athletes post-HIIT cardiovascular recovery?

Author

Listed:
  • Murat Kasap
  • Gökhan Recep Aydin

Abstract

Post-exercise recovery strategies are critical for athletic performance, yet the acute effects of controlled breathing techniques (box breathing vs. 6 bpm [6 breaths/min]) following high-intensity interval training (HIIT) remain understudied. This study compared three breathing protocols’ impact on cardiovascular and perceptual recovery metrics. In a randomized crossover design, 40 physically active university students (25 males, 15 females; age 20.95 ± 1.75 years) completed three HIIT sessions on a spin bike (15 min, 1:2 work: rest ratio at 85–95% HRmax). One of three recovery breathing protocols was applied during each session: Spontaneous breathing (control), Box breathing (4-4-4-4), 6 bpm (5–5). Heart rate (HR) was monitored continuously, and perceived exertion was assessed via Borg Scale (6–20). Data were analyzed using repeated-measures ANOVA and Tukey’s HSD post-hoc tests (α = 0.05). Box breathing elicited significantly: Higher post-exercise HR (164.65 ± 9.40 bpm) vs. 6 bpm (154.77 ± 12.18 bpm; p

Suggested Citation

  • Murat Kasap & Gökhan Recep Aydin, 2025. "Box breathing or six breaths per minute: Which strategy improves athletes post-HIIT cardiovascular recovery?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(11), pages 1-12, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0336615
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0336615
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0336615
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0336615&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0336615?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0336615. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.