Cargando…
Wearable positive end-expiratory pressure valve improves exercise performance
We tested a PEEP (4.2 cmH(2)O) mouthpiece (PMP) on maximal cycling performance in healthy adults. Experiment-1, PMP vs. non-PMP mouthpiece (CON) [n = 9 (5♂), Age = 30 ± 2 yr]; Experiment-2, PMP vs. no mouthpiece (NMP) [n = 10 (7♂), Age = 27 ± 1 yr]. At timepoint 1 in both experiments (mouthpiece con...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Chengdu Sport University
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9219351/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35782287 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.smhs.2020.06.002 |
_version_ | 1784732093060743168 |
---|---|
author | Crouse, Stephen F. Lytle, Jason R. Boutros, Sean Benton, William Moreno, Michael McCulloch, Patrick C. Lambert, Brad S. |
author_facet | Crouse, Stephen F. Lytle, Jason R. Boutros, Sean Benton, William Moreno, Michael McCulloch, Patrick C. Lambert, Brad S. |
author_sort | Crouse, Stephen F. |
collection | PubMed |
description | We tested a PEEP (4.2 cmH(2)O) mouthpiece (PMP) on maximal cycling performance in healthy adults. Experiment-1, PMP vs. non-PMP mouthpiece (CON) [n = 9 (5♂), Age = 30 ± 2 yr]; Experiment-2, PMP vs. no mouthpiece (NMP) [n = 10 (7♂), Age = 27 ± 1 yr]. At timepoint 1 in both experiments (mouthpiece condition randomized) subjects performed graded cycling testing (GXT) (Corival® cycle ergometer) to determine [Formula: see text] O(2peak (ml∗kg∗min)(−1)), O(2)pulse ((mlO(2)∗bt)(−1)), GXT endurance time (GXT-T((s))), and [Formula: see text] O(2(ml∗kg∗min)(−1))-at-ventilatory-threshold ([Formula: see text] O(2) @VT). At timepoint 2 72 h later, subjects completed a ventilatory-threshold-endurance-ride [VTER((s))] timed to exhaustion at [Formula: see text] O(2) @VT power ((W)). One week later at timepoints 3 and 4 (time-of-day controlled), subjects repeated testing protocols under the alternate mouthpiece condition. Selected results (paired T-test, p<0.05): Experiment 1 PMP vs. CON, respectively: [Formula: see text] O(2peak) = 45.2 ± 2.4 vs. 42.4 ± 2.3 p<0.05; [Formula: see text] O(2)@VT = 33.7 ± 2.0 vs. 32.3 ± 1.6; GXT-TTE = 521.7 ± 73.4 vs. 495.3 ± 72.8 (p<0.05); VTER = 846.2 ± 166.0 vs. 743.1 ± 124.7; O2pulse = 24.5 ± 1.4 vs. 23.1 ± 1.3 (p<0.05). Experiment 2 PMP vs. NMP, respectively: [Formula: see text] O(2peak) = 43.3 ± 1.6 vs. 41.7 ± 1.6 (p<0.05); [Formula: see text] O(2)@VT = 31.1 ± 1.2 vs. 29.1 ± 1.3 (p<0.05); GXT-TTE = 511.7 ± 49.6 vs. 486.4 ± 49.6 (p<0.05); VTER 872.4 ± 134.0 vs. 792.9 ± 122.4; O(2)pulse = 24.1 ± 0.9 vs. 23.4 ± 0.9 (p<0.05). Results demonstrate that the PMP conferred a significant performance benefit to cyclists completing high intensity cycling exercise. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9219351 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Chengdu Sport University |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-92193512022-06-30 Wearable positive end-expiratory pressure valve improves exercise performance Crouse, Stephen F. Lytle, Jason R. Boutros, Sean Benton, William Moreno, Michael McCulloch, Patrick C. Lambert, Brad S. Sports Med Health Sci Original Research We tested a PEEP (4.2 cmH(2)O) mouthpiece (PMP) on maximal cycling performance in healthy adults. Experiment-1, PMP vs. non-PMP mouthpiece (CON) [n = 9 (5♂), Age = 30 ± 2 yr]; Experiment-2, PMP vs. no mouthpiece (NMP) [n = 10 (7♂), Age = 27 ± 1 yr]. At timepoint 1 in both experiments (mouthpiece condition randomized) subjects performed graded cycling testing (GXT) (Corival® cycle ergometer) to determine [Formula: see text] O(2peak (ml∗kg∗min)(−1)), O(2)pulse ((mlO(2)∗bt)(−1)), GXT endurance time (GXT-T((s))), and [Formula: see text] O(2(ml∗kg∗min)(−1))-at-ventilatory-threshold ([Formula: see text] O(2) @VT). At timepoint 2 72 h later, subjects completed a ventilatory-threshold-endurance-ride [VTER((s))] timed to exhaustion at [Formula: see text] O(2) @VT power ((W)). One week later at timepoints 3 and 4 (time-of-day controlled), subjects repeated testing protocols under the alternate mouthpiece condition. Selected results (paired T-test, p<0.05): Experiment 1 PMP vs. CON, respectively: [Formula: see text] O(2peak) = 45.2 ± 2.4 vs. 42.4 ± 2.3 p<0.05; [Formula: see text] O(2)@VT = 33.7 ± 2.0 vs. 32.3 ± 1.6; GXT-TTE = 521.7 ± 73.4 vs. 495.3 ± 72.8 (p<0.05); VTER = 846.2 ± 166.0 vs. 743.1 ± 124.7; O2pulse = 24.5 ± 1.4 vs. 23.1 ± 1.3 (p<0.05). Experiment 2 PMP vs. NMP, respectively: [Formula: see text] O(2peak) = 43.3 ± 1.6 vs. 41.7 ± 1.6 (p<0.05); [Formula: see text] O(2)@VT = 31.1 ± 1.2 vs. 29.1 ± 1.3 (p<0.05); GXT-TTE = 511.7 ± 49.6 vs. 486.4 ± 49.6 (p<0.05); VTER 872.4 ± 134.0 vs. 792.9 ± 122.4; O(2)pulse = 24.1 ± 0.9 vs. 23.4 ± 0.9 (p<0.05). Results demonstrate that the PMP conferred a significant performance benefit to cyclists completing high intensity cycling exercise. Chengdu Sport University 2020-07-10 /pmc/articles/PMC9219351/ /pubmed/35782287 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.smhs.2020.06.002 Text en © 2020 Chengdu Sport University. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Original Research Crouse, Stephen F. Lytle, Jason R. Boutros, Sean Benton, William Moreno, Michael McCulloch, Patrick C. Lambert, Brad S. Wearable positive end-expiratory pressure valve improves exercise performance |
title | Wearable positive end-expiratory pressure valve improves exercise performance |
title_full | Wearable positive end-expiratory pressure valve improves exercise performance |
title_fullStr | Wearable positive end-expiratory pressure valve improves exercise performance |
title_full_unstemmed | Wearable positive end-expiratory pressure valve improves exercise performance |
title_short | Wearable positive end-expiratory pressure valve improves exercise performance |
title_sort | wearable positive end-expiratory pressure valve improves exercise performance |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9219351/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35782287 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.smhs.2020.06.002 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT crousestephenf wearablepositiveendexpiratorypressurevalveimprovesexerciseperformance AT lytlejasonr wearablepositiveendexpiratorypressurevalveimprovesexerciseperformance AT boutrossean wearablepositiveendexpiratorypressurevalveimprovesexerciseperformance AT bentonwilliam wearablepositiveendexpiratorypressurevalveimprovesexerciseperformance AT morenomichael wearablepositiveendexpiratorypressurevalveimprovesexerciseperformance AT mccullochpatrickc wearablepositiveendexpiratorypressurevalveimprovesexerciseperformance AT lambertbrads wearablepositiveendexpiratorypressurevalveimprovesexerciseperformance |