Effect of Contrast Water Therapy Duration on Recovery of Running Performance

2012 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 130-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathan G. Versey ◽  
Shona L. Halson ◽  
Brian T. Dawson
Keyword(s):  
Dose Response ◽  
High Intensity ◽  
Thermal Sensation ◽  
Water Immersion ◽  
Time Trial ◽  
Whole Body ◽  
Running Performance ◽  
Time Points ◽  
Water Therapy ◽  
Contrast Water Therapy

Purpose:To investigate whether contrast water therapy (CWT) assists acute recovery from high-intensity running and whether a dose-response relationship exists.Methods:Ten trained male runners completed 4 trials, each commencing with a 3000-m time trial, followed by 8 × 400-m intervals with 1 min of recovery. Ten minutes postexercise, participants performed 1 of 4 recovery protocols: CWT, by alternating 1 min hot (38°C) and 1 min cold (15°C) for 6 (CWT6), 12 (CWT12), or 18 min (CWT18), or a seated rest control trial. The 3000-m time trial was repeated 2 h later.Results:3000-m performance slowed from 632 ± 4 to 647 ± 4 s in control, 631 ± 4 to 642 ± 4 s in CWT6, 633 ± 4 to 648 ± 4 s in CWT12, and 631 ± 4 to 647 ± 4 s in CWT18. Following CWT6, performance (smallest worthwhile change of 0.3%) was substantially faster than control (87% probability, 0.8 ± 0.8% mean ± 90% confidence limit), however, there was no effect for CWT12 (34%, 0.0 ± 1.0%) or CWT18 (34%, –0.1 ± 0.8%). There were no substantial differences between conditions in exercise heart rates, or postexercise calf and thigh girths. Algometer thigh pain threshold during CWT12 was higher at all time points compared with control. Subjective measures of thermal sensation and muscle soreness were lower in all CWT conditions at some post-water-immersion time points compared with control; however, there were no consistent differences in whole body fatigue following CWT.Conclusions:Contrast water therapy for 6 min assisted acute recovery from high-intensity running; however, CWT duration did not have a dose-response effect on recovery of running performance.

Post-exercise Heart Rate Variability: Whole-body Cryotherapy vs. Contrast Water Therapy

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benoît Sautillet ◽  
Pierre Marie Leprêtre ◽  
Laurent Schmitt ◽  
Said Ahmaidi ◽  
Guillaume Costalat
Keyword(s):  
High Intensity ◽  
High Frequency ◽  
Whole Body ◽  
Autonomic Modulation ◽  
High Frequency Power ◽  
Passive Recovery ◽  
Water Therapy ◽  
Contrast Water Therapy ◽  
Whole Body Cryotherapy ◽  
Frequency Power

AbstractHigh-intensity training sessions are known to alter cardiac autonomic modulation. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of whole-body cryotherapy, contrast water therapy and passive recovery on the time course of cardiac autonomic markers following a standardized HIT session. Eleven runners completed a high intensity session followed by one of the following recovery interventions: whole-body cryotherapy, contrast water therapy or passive recovery. Changes in cardiac autonomic modulation were assessed in supine and standing positions during an active tilt test at pre-, post-14 h and post-38 h. In supine, high-frequency power increased from pre- to post-14 h following whole-body cryotherapy (1661.1±914.5 vs. 2799.0±948.4 ms2, respectively; p=0.023) and contrast water therapy (1906.1±1327.9 vs. 4174.3±2762.9 ms2, respectively; p=0.004) whereas high frequency power decreased in response to passive recovery (p=0.009). In standing, low-frequency power increased from pre-to post-38 h (1784.3 ± 953.7 vs. 3339.8±1862.7 ms2, respectively; p=0.017) leading to an increase in total power from pre- to post-38 h (1990.8 ± 1089.4 vs. 3606.1±1992.0 ms2, respectively; p=0.017). Spectral analysis revealed that contrast water therapy appears to be a more efficient recovery strategy than whole-body cryotherapy in restoring cardiac autonomic homeostasis.

Effects of Face Mask Use on Objective and Subjective Measures of Thermoregulation During Exercise in the Heat

2021 ◽  
pp. 194173812110282
Author(s):  
Ayami Yoshihara ◽  
Erin E. Dierickx ◽  
Gabrielle J. Brewer ◽  
Yasuki Sekiguchi ◽  
Rebecca L. Stearns ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Exercise Intensity ◽  
Thermal Sensation ◽  
Face Mask ◽  
Whole Body ◽  
Moderate Exercise ◽  
Physically Active ◽  
Time Points ◽  
The Face ◽  
And Control ◽  
Moderate Exercise Intensity

Background: While increased face mask use has helped reduce COVID-19 transmission, there have been concerns about its influence on thermoregulation during exercise in the heat, but consistent, evidence-based recommendations are lacking. Hypothesis: No physiological differences would exist during low-to-moderate exercise intensity in the heat between trials with and without face masks, but perceptual sensations could vary. Study Design: Crossover study. Level of Evidence: Level 2. Methods: Twelve physically active participants (8 male, 4 female; age = 24 ± 3 years) completed 4 face mask trials and 1 control trial (no mask) in the heat (32.3°C ± 0.04°C; 54.4% ± 0.7% relative humidity [RH]). The protocol was 60 minutes of walking and jogging between 35% and 60% of relative VO2max. Rectal temperature (Trec), heart rate (HR), temperature and humidity inside and outside of the face mask (Tmicro_in, Tmicro_out, RHmicro_in, RHmicro_out) and perceptual variables (rating of perceived exertion (RPE), thermal sensation, thirst sensation, fatigue level, and overall breathing discomfort) were monitored throughout all trials. Results: Mean Trec and HR increased at 30- and 60-minute time points compared with 0-minute time points, but no difference existed between face mask trials and control trials ( P > 0.05). Mean Tmicro_in, RHmicro_in, and humidity difference inside and outside of the face mask (ΔRHmicro) were significantly different between face mask trials ( P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in perceptual variables between face mask trials and control trials ( P > 0.05), except overall breathing discomfort ( P < 0.01). Higher RHmicro_in, RPE, and thermal sensation significantly predicted higher overall breathing discomfort ( r2 = 0.418; P < 0.01). Conclusion: Face mask use during 60 minutes of low-to-moderate exercise intensity in the heat did not significantly affect Trec or HR. Although face mask use may affect overall breathing discomfort due to the changes in the face mask microenvironment, face mask use itself did not cause an increase in whole body thermal stress. Clinical Relevance: Face mask use is feasible and safe during exercise in the heat, at low-to-moderate exercise intensities, for physically active, healthy individuals.

scholarly journals Effects of mild whole body hypothermia on self-paced exercise performance

2018 ◽  
Vol 125 (2) ◽  
pp. 479-485
Author(s):  
Steven A. H. Ferguson ◽  
Neil D. Eves ◽  
Brian D. Roy ◽  
Gary J. Hodges ◽  
Stephen S. Cheung
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Temperature ◽  
Exercise Performance ◽  
Power Output ◽  
High Intensity ◽  
Mild Hypothermia ◽  
Oxygenation Index ◽  
Time Trial ◽  
Oxygen Availability ◽  
High Intensity Exercise ◽  
Whole Body

This study examined self-paced, high-intensity exercise during mild hypothermia and whether hyperoxia might offset any potential impairment. Twelve trained males each completed 15-km time trials in three environmental conditions: Neutral (23°C, [Formula: see text] 0.21), Cold (0°C, [Formula: see text] 0.21), and Cold+Hyper (0°C, [Formula: see text] 0.40). Cold and Cold+Hyper trials occurred after a 0.5°C drop in rectal temperature. Rectal temperature was higher ( P ≤ 0.016) throughout Neutral compared with Cold and Cold+Hyper; Cold had a higher ( P ≤ 0.035) rectal temperature than Cold+Hyper from 2.5 to 7.5 km, and hyperoxia did not alter thermal sensation or comfort. Oxyhemoglobin saturation decreased from ~98% to ~94% with Neutral and Cold, but was maintained at ~99% in Cold+Hyper ( P < 0.01). Cerebral tissue oxygenation index (TOI) was higher in Neutral than in Cold throughout the time trial (TT) ( P ≤ 0.001), whereas Cold+Hyper were unchanged ( P ≥ 0.567) from Neutral by 2.5 km. Muscle TOI was maintained in Cold+Hyper compared with Neutral and was higher ( P ≤ 0.046) than Cold throughout the entire TT. Power output during Cold (246 ± 41 W) was lower than Neutral (260 ± 38 W) at all 2.5-km intervals ( P ≤ 0.012) except at 12.5 km. Power output during Cold+Hyper (256 ± 42 W) was unchanged ( P ≥ 0.161) from Neutral throughout the TT, and was higher than Cold from 7.5 km onward. Average cadence was higher in Neutral (93 ± 8 rpm) than in either Cold or Cold+Hyper (Cold: 89 ± 7 and Cold+Hyper: 90 ± 8 rpm, P = 0.031). In conclusion, mild hypothermia reduced self-paced exercise performance; hyperoxia during mild hypothermia restored performance to thermoneutral levels, likely due to maintenance of oxygen availability rather than any thermogenic benefit. NEW & NOTEWORTHY We examined self-paced, high-intensity exercise with 0.5°C rectal temperature decreases in a 0°C ambient environment, along with whether hyperoxia could offset any potential impairment. During a 15-km time trial, power output was lower with hypothermia than with thermoneutral. However, with hypothermia, hyperoxia of [Formula: see text] = 0.40 restored power output despite there being no thermophysiological improvement. Hypothermia impairs exercise performance, whereas hyperoxia likely restored performance due to maintenance of oxygen availability rather than any thermogenic benefit.

Improvement of 800-m Running Performance With Prior High-Intensity Exercise

2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen A. Ingham ◽  
Barry W. Fudge ◽  
Jamie S. Pringle ◽  
Andrew M. Jones
Keyword(s):  
High Intensity ◽  
Time Trial ◽  
High Intensity Exercise ◽  
Distance Runners ◽  
Running Performance ◽  
Warm Up ◽  
Time Trial Performance ◽  
Mean Response Time ◽  
Potential Impact ◽  
Trial Performance

Prior high-intensity exercise increases the oxidative energy contribution to subsequent exercise and may enhance exercise tolerance. The potential impact of a high-intensity warm-up on competitive performance, however, has not been investigated.Purpose:To test the hypothesis that a high-intensity warm-up would speed VO2 kinetics and enhance 800-m running performance in well-trained athletes.Methods:Eleven highly trained middle-distance runners completed two 800-m time trials on separate days on an indoor track, preceded by 2 different warm-up procedures. The 800-m time trials were preceded by a 10-min self-paced jog and standardized mobility drills, followed by either 6 × 50-m strides (control [CON]) or 2 × 50-m strides and a continuous high-intensity 200-m run (HWU) at race pace. Blood [La] was measured before the time trials, and VO2 was measured breath by breath throughout exercise.Results:800-m time-trial performance was significantly faster after HWU (124.5 ± 8.3 vs CON, 125.7 ± 8.7 s, P < .05). Blood [La] was greater after HWU (3.6 ± 1.9 vs CON, 1.7 ± 0.8 mM; P < .01). The mean response time for VO2 was not different between conditions (HWU, 27 ± 6 vs CON, 28 ± 7 s), but total O2 consumed (HWU, 119 ± 18 vs CON, 109 ± 28 ml/kg, P = .05) and peak VO2 attained (HWU, 4.21 ± 0.85 vs CON, 3.91 ± 0.63 L/min; P = .08) tended to be greater after HWU.Conclusions:These data indicate that a sustained high-intensity warm-up enhances 800-m time-trial performance in trained athletes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document