Cargando…

The Energetic Costs of Uphill Locomotion in Trail Running: Physiological Consequences Due to Uphill Locomotion Pattern—A Feasibility Study

The primary aim of our feasibility reporting was to define physiological differences in trail running (TR) athletes due to different uphill locomotion patterns, uphill running versus uphill walking. In this context, a feasibility analysis of TR athletes’ cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) data,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zimmermann, Paul, Müller, Nico, Schöffl, Volker, Ehrlich, Benedikt, Moser, Othmar, Schöffl, Isabelle
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9787284/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36556435
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/life12122070
_version_ 1784858475196579840
author Zimmermann, Paul
Müller, Nico
Schöffl, Volker
Ehrlich, Benedikt
Moser, Othmar
Schöffl, Isabelle
author_facet Zimmermann, Paul
Müller, Nico
Schöffl, Volker
Ehrlich, Benedikt
Moser, Othmar
Schöffl, Isabelle
author_sort Zimmermann, Paul
collection PubMed
description The primary aim of our feasibility reporting was to define physiological differences in trail running (TR) athletes due to different uphill locomotion patterns, uphill running versus uphill walking. In this context, a feasibility analysis of TR athletes’ cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) data, which were obtained in summer 2020 at the accompanying sports medicine performance center, was performed. Fourteen TR athletes (n = 14, male = 10, female = 4, age: 36.8 ± 8.0 years) were evaluated for specific physiological demands by outdoor CPET during a short uphill TR performance. The obtained data of the participating TR athletes were compared for anthropometric data, CPET parameters, such as [Formula: see text] , [Formula: see text] , maximal breath frequency (BF(max)) and peak oxygen pulse as well as energetic demands, i.e., the energy cost of running (C(r)). All participating TR athletes showed excellent performance data, whereby across both different uphill locomotion strategies, significant differences were solely revealed for [Formula: see text] (p = 0.033) and time to reach mountain peak (p = 0.008). These results provide new insights and might contribute to a comprehensive understanding of cardiorespiratory consequences to short uphill locomotion strategy in TR athletes and might strengthen further scientific research in this field.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9787284
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97872842022-12-24 The Energetic Costs of Uphill Locomotion in Trail Running: Physiological Consequences Due to Uphill Locomotion Pattern—A Feasibility Study Zimmermann, Paul Müller, Nico Schöffl, Volker Ehrlich, Benedikt Moser, Othmar Schöffl, Isabelle Life (Basel) Article The primary aim of our feasibility reporting was to define physiological differences in trail running (TR) athletes due to different uphill locomotion patterns, uphill running versus uphill walking. In this context, a feasibility analysis of TR athletes’ cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) data, which were obtained in summer 2020 at the accompanying sports medicine performance center, was performed. Fourteen TR athletes (n = 14, male = 10, female = 4, age: 36.8 ± 8.0 years) were evaluated for specific physiological demands by outdoor CPET during a short uphill TR performance. The obtained data of the participating TR athletes were compared for anthropometric data, CPET parameters, such as [Formula: see text] , [Formula: see text] , maximal breath frequency (BF(max)) and peak oxygen pulse as well as energetic demands, i.e., the energy cost of running (C(r)). All participating TR athletes showed excellent performance data, whereby across both different uphill locomotion strategies, significant differences were solely revealed for [Formula: see text] (p = 0.033) and time to reach mountain peak (p = 0.008). These results provide new insights and might contribute to a comprehensive understanding of cardiorespiratory consequences to short uphill locomotion strategy in TR athletes and might strengthen further scientific research in this field. MDPI 2022-12-09 /pmc/articles/PMC9787284/ /pubmed/36556435 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/life12122070 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Zimmermann, Paul
Müller, Nico
Schöffl, Volker
Ehrlich, Benedikt
Moser, Othmar
Schöffl, Isabelle
The Energetic Costs of Uphill Locomotion in Trail Running: Physiological Consequences Due to Uphill Locomotion Pattern—A Feasibility Study
title The Energetic Costs of Uphill Locomotion in Trail Running: Physiological Consequences Due to Uphill Locomotion Pattern—A Feasibility Study
title_full The Energetic Costs of Uphill Locomotion in Trail Running: Physiological Consequences Due to Uphill Locomotion Pattern—A Feasibility Study
title_fullStr The Energetic Costs of Uphill Locomotion in Trail Running: Physiological Consequences Due to Uphill Locomotion Pattern—A Feasibility Study
title_full_unstemmed The Energetic Costs of Uphill Locomotion in Trail Running: Physiological Consequences Due to Uphill Locomotion Pattern—A Feasibility Study
title_short The Energetic Costs of Uphill Locomotion in Trail Running: Physiological Consequences Due to Uphill Locomotion Pattern—A Feasibility Study
title_sort energetic costs of uphill locomotion in trail running: physiological consequences due to uphill locomotion pattern—a feasibility study
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9787284/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36556435
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/life12122070
work_keys_str_mv AT zimmermannpaul theenergeticcostsofuphilllocomotionintrailrunningphysiologicalconsequencesduetouphilllocomotionpatternafeasibilitystudy
AT mullernico theenergeticcostsofuphilllocomotionintrailrunningphysiologicalconsequencesduetouphilllocomotionpatternafeasibilitystudy
AT schofflvolker theenergeticcostsofuphilllocomotionintrailrunningphysiologicalconsequencesduetouphilllocomotionpatternafeasibilitystudy
AT ehrlichbenedikt theenergeticcostsofuphilllocomotionintrailrunningphysiologicalconsequencesduetouphilllocomotionpatternafeasibilitystudy
AT moserothmar theenergeticcostsofuphilllocomotionintrailrunningphysiologicalconsequencesduetouphilllocomotionpatternafeasibilitystudy
AT schofflisabelle theenergeticcostsofuphilllocomotionintrailrunningphysiologicalconsequencesduetouphilllocomotionpatternafeasibilitystudy
AT zimmermannpaul energeticcostsofuphilllocomotionintrailrunningphysiologicalconsequencesduetouphilllocomotionpatternafeasibilitystudy
AT mullernico energeticcostsofuphilllocomotionintrailrunningphysiologicalconsequencesduetouphilllocomotionpatternafeasibilitystudy
AT schofflvolker energeticcostsofuphilllocomotionintrailrunningphysiologicalconsequencesduetouphilllocomotionpatternafeasibilitystudy
AT ehrlichbenedikt energeticcostsofuphilllocomotionintrailrunningphysiologicalconsequencesduetouphilllocomotionpatternafeasibilitystudy
AT moserothmar energeticcostsofuphilllocomotionintrailrunningphysiologicalconsequencesduetouphilllocomotionpatternafeasibilitystudy
AT schofflisabelle energeticcostsofuphilllocomotionintrailrunningphysiologicalconsequencesduetouphilllocomotionpatternafeasibilitystudy