| Literature DB >> 28421004 |
Alessandro Tonacci1, Simona Mrakic-Sposta2, Kristian Ujka1, Francesco Sansone1, Alice Ferrisi3, Guido Giardini4, Raffaele Conte1, Lorenza Pratali1.
Abstract
Introduction: Given the wide proliferation of ultra-long endurance races, it is important to understand the physiological response of the athletes to improve their safety. We evaluated the cognitive and neurosensory effects on ultra-endurance athletes during the Transpyrénéa (866 Km, 65,000 m positive slope), held on the French Pyrenees. Materials andEntities:
Keywords: cognition; extreme physiology; neurosensory assessment; olfaction; smell
Year: 2017 PMID: 28421004 PMCID: PMC5378714 DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2017.00201
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Physiol ISSN: 1664-042X Impact factor: 4.566
Study population.
| Number of subjects | 40 |
| Age (years, mean ± SD) | 43.8 ± 8.8 |
| Male gender, n (%) | 36 (90) |
| Height (cm, mean ± SD) | 176.1 ± 7.4 |
| Smoking habit, n current/n former smokers (%) | 2/4 (5/10) |
| Diabetes, n (%) | 1 (2.5) |
| Hypertension, n (%) | 3 (7.5) |
| Training, years (mean ± SD) | 19.6 ± 15.5 |
| Weekly training (h/week, mean ± SD) | 11.5 ± 6.7 |
Characteristics of the study population throughout the race (.
| Number of subjects | 40 | 28 | 20 | 13 |
| Age (years, mean ± SD) | 43.8 ± 8.8 | 43.5 ± 8.5 | 44.8 ± 8.7 | 43.8 ± 7.6 |
| Male gender, n (%) | 36 (90) | 25 (89.2) | 17 (85) | 11 (84.6) |
| Hours walked (mean ± SD) | 0.0 ± 0.0 | 60.0 ± 21.3 | 185.9 ± 23.7 | 363.3 ± 33.1 |
| Weight (kg, mean ± SD) | 72.6 ± 10.9 | 70.6 ± 9.5 | 70.3 ± 8.9 | 68.1 ± 9.8 |
| BMI (kg/m2, mean ± SD) | 23.3 ± 2.6 | 22.6 ± 2.4 | 22.9 ± 1.8 | 21.3 ± 1.6 |
| Fat mass (kg, mean ± SD) | 5.4 ± 3.5 | 3.7 ± 2.2 | 2.9 ± 2.6 | 2.3 ± 0.9 |
| Total body water (kg, mean ± SD) | 49.2 ± 7.2 | 49.0 ± 6.4 | 49.6 ± 5.7 | 46.2 ± 7.0 |
| Total sleep time (hours, mean ± SD) | 0.0 ± 0.0 | 9.3 ± 5.4 | 22.4 ± 10.0 | 29.5 ± 20.5 |
| Normalized total sleep time (% of the total race time, mean) | 0.0 | 14.9 | 13.6 | 9.6 |
| Olfactory identification score (mean ± SD) | 24.9 ± 4.3*◦ | 23.3 ± 3.9* | 22.6 ± 3.7 | 22.8 ± 3.5◦ |
| Shortened COWAT score (mean ± SD) | 10.8 ± 2.9◦§ | 11.4 ± 2.7§ | 12.9 ± 2.8§ | 12.9 ± 3.0◦§ |
| TMT-A (ms, mean ± SD) | 57120.5 ± 36539.0 | 54540.1 ± 12294.6 | ||
| TMT-B (ms, mean ± SD) | 62676.2 ± 25749.9 | 62488.6 ± 19303.6 | ||
| TMT-B/A (ratio, mean ± SD) | 1.199 ± 0.450 | 1.138 ± 0.183 | ||
Figure 1Olfactory performances throughout the race.
Figure 2Shortened COWAT test scores throughout the race.
Figure 3Correlation between olfactory identification and TMT-A at T0.
Figure 4Correlation between olfactory identification delta (calculated between T3 and T0) and TST.