| Literature DB >> 30811512 |
Hui C Choo1, Jeremiah J Peiffer2, João P Lopes-Silva3, Ricardo N O Mesquita1, Tatsuro Amano4, Narihiko Kondo5, Chris R Abbiss1.
Abstract
Two studies were conducted to examine the effects of ice slushy ingestion (ICE) and cold water immersion (CWI) on thermoregulatory and sweat responses during constant (study 1) and self-paced (study 2) exercise. In study 1, 11 men cycled at 40-50% of peak aerobic power for 60 min (33.2 ± 0.3°C, 45.9 ± 0.5% relative humidity, RH). In study 2, 11 men cycled for 60 min at perceived exertion (RPE) equivalent to 15 (33.9 ± 0.2°C and 42.5 ± 3.9%RH). In both studies, each trial was preceded by 30 min of CWI (~22°C), ICE or no cooling (CON). Rectal temperature (Tre), skin temperature (Tsk), thermal sensation, and sweat responses were measured. In study 1, ICE decreased Tre-Tsk gradient versus CON (p = 0.005) during first 5 min of exercise, while CWI increased Tre-Tsk gradient versus CON and ICE for up to 20 min during the exercise (p<0.05). In study 2, thermal sensation was lower in CWI versus CON and ICE for up to 35-40 min during the exercise (p<0.05). ICE reduced thermal sensation versus CON during the first 20 min of exercise (p<0.05). In study 2, CWI improved mean power output (MPO) by ~8 W, compared with CON only (p = 0.024). In both studies, CWI (p<0.001) and ICE (p = 0.019) delayed sweating by 1-5 min but did not change the body temperature sweating threshold, compared with CON (both p>0.05). Increased Tre-Tsk gradient by CWI improved MPO while ICE reduced Tre but did not confer any ergogenic effect. Both precooling treatments attenuated the thermal efferent signals until a specific body temperature threshold was reached.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30811512 PMCID: PMC6392407 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0212966
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Mean physiological and perceptual responses during 60 min of cycling at fixed exercise intensity (study 1), and during the RPE clamp exercise (study 2).
| CON | CWI | ICE | P-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whole body sweat loss (mL) | 1244 ± 374 | 1064 ± 343 | 1128 ± 329 | 0.016 |
| Thermal sensation (AU) | 6.0 ± 1.1 | 5.7 ± 0.6 | 5.8 ± 0.7 | 0.384 |
| RPE (AU) | 13.5 ± 1.9 | 13.4 ± 1.8 | 13.4 ± 1.6 | 0.982 |
| Heart rate (beats∙min-1) | 154 ± 14 | 149 ± 15 | 153 ± 14 | 0.018 |
| TreΔ (°C)
( | 1.3 ± 0.5 | 1.2 ± 0.6 | 1.6 ± 0.6 | <0.001 |
| LSRarm | 1.25 ± 0.75 | 1.10 ± 0.53 | 1.14 ± 0.44 | 0.470 |
| LSRth | 0.71 ± 0.46 | 0.74 ± 0.36 | 0.69 ± 0.35 | 0.772 |
| Mean power output (W) | 130 ± 20 | 138 ± 18 | 129 ± 25 | 0.018 |
| Total work output (kJ) | 470 ± 74 | 498 ± 65 | 464 ± 90 | 0.018 |
| Whole body sweat loss (mL) | 1394 ± 381 | 1239 ± 367 | 1396 ± 119 | 0.004 |
| Heart rate (beats∙min-1) | 144 ± 20 | 141 ± 14 | 144 ± 15 | 0.679 |
| TreΔ (°C) | 1.4 ± 0.5 | 1.2 ± 0.6 | 1.7 ± 0.5 | <0.001 |
| LSRarm | 1.21 ± 0.35 | 1.21 ± 0.53 | 1.20 ± 0.60 | 0.994 |
| LSRth | 0.63 ± 0.19 | 0.68 ± 0.29 | 0.66 ± 0.27 | 0.592 |
CON, control; CWI, cold water immersion, ICE, ice slushy ingestion; RPE, rating of perceived exertion; TreΔ, magnitude of increase in rectal temperature during exercise; LSRarm, local sweat rate for the arm at the end of exercise; LSRth, local sweat rate for the thigh at the end of exercise
* p<0.05 versus CWI
# p<0.05 versus ICE.
Data are mean ± SD for n = 11 unless otherwise stated. See S5 Table for effect sizes (Cohen’s d) calculated from mean differences between conditions and pooled SD.
Fig 1T CON, control; CWI, cold water immersion; ICE, ice slushy ingestion; * p<0.05 CWI versus CON; ** p<0.05 ICE versus CON; † p<0.05 CWI versus ICE. Data are mean ± SD for n = 11 for Tsk. Due to missing data at certain time points during the exercise, data for Tre and Tre-Tsk gradient are n = 10 during the first 10 min of exercise for all conditions and n = 8 or 9 thereafter (see S1 and S2 Tables for clarification).
Fig 2Changes in tHb (A), HbO CON, control; CWI, cold water immersion; ICE, ice slushy ingestion; * p<0.05 CWI versus CON; ** p<0.05 ICE versus CON; † p<0.05 CWI versus ICE. Data are expressed as absolute changes from the baseline values and are mean ± SD for n = 11, except for the final 20 min of exercise during CON and the final 10 min of exercise during ICE where n = 10 due to probe damage.
Fig 3T CON, control; CWI, cold -water immersion; ICE, ice slushy ingestion; * p<0.05 CWI versus CON; ** p<0.05 ICE versus CON; † p<0.05 CWI versus ICE. Data are mean ± SD for n = 11 unless otherwise stated. Due to missing data at certain time points during the exercise, data for Tre and Tre-Tsk gradient are n = 11 during the first 25 min of exercise for all conditions, and n = 10 for CWI and ICE thereafter (see S3 and S4 Tables for clarification).
Fig 4Changes in tHb (A), OxyHb (B), Hb (C) TOI (D), and skin PU (E) during 60 min of cycling at RPE 15 (study 2). CON, control; CWI, cold water immersion; ICE, ice slushy ingestion; * p<0.05 CWI versus CON; ** p<0.05 ICE versus CON; † p<0.05 CWI versus ICE. Data are expressed as absolute changes from the baseline values and are mean ± SD for n = 11, except for the final 30 min of exercise during CWI where n = 10 due to probe damage.
Tre and Tb at the onset of sweating and slopes of regression lines determined after plotting average LSR against Tre and Tb during exercise at fixed intensity (study 1) and during the RPE clamp exercise (study 2).
| CON | CWI | ICE | P-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Onset of sweating (min) | 1.8 ± 1.8 | 6.4 ± 2.2 | 2.7 ± 1.6 | <0.001 |
| Tre sweat threshold (°C) | 37.0 ± 0.3 | 37.1 ± 0.2 | 36.8 ± 0.3 | <0.001 |
| Tb sweat threshold (°C) | 36.5 ± 0.3 | 36.5 ± 0.3 | 36.5 ± 0.4 | 0.973 |
| Tre sweat sensitivity (mg∙cm-2∙min-1∙°C-1) | 1.51 ± 0.61 | 1.89 ± 0.82 | 1.42 ± 0.68 | 0.001 |
| Tb sweat sensitivity (mg∙cm-2∙min-1∙°C-1) | 1.18 ± 0.42 | 1.36 ± 0.55 | 1.39 ± 0.63 | 0.007 |
CON, control; CWI, cold water immersion; ICE, ice slushy ingestion; Tre, rectal temperature; Tb, weighted mean body; LSR, average local sweat rate for arm and thigh
* p<0.05 versus CWI
# p<0.05 versus ICE. Data are mean ± SD for n = 19 from study 1 and 2. See S5 Table for effect sizes (Cohen’s d) calculated from mean differences between conditions and pooled SD.