Home > Riviste > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness > Fascicoli precedenti > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2002 September;42(3) > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2002 September;42(3):295-9

ULTIMO FASCICOLO
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Estratti

THE JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE AND PHYSICAL FITNESS

Rivista di Medicina, Traumatologia e Psicologia dello Sport


Indexed/Abstracted in: Chemical Abstracts, CINAHL, Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 1,215


eTOC

 

Original articles  EXERCISE PHYSIOLOGY AND BIOMECHANICS


The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2002 September;42(3):295-9

Copyright © 2009 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

lingua: Inglese

Influence of changes in nasal ventilation on estimated workload during submaximal field running

Bourdin M., Sallet P., Dufour A. B., Lacour J. R.

From the Laboratoire de Physiologie de l’Exercice GIP Exercice, Faculté de Médecine Lyon-Sud Oullins Cedex, France *Laboratoire de Biométrie, Génétique et Biologie des Populations, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1 Villeurbanne Cedex, France


PDF  


Back­ground. ­Breathe ­Right® (BR) exter­nal ­nasal dila­tor ­have ­become increas­ing­ly pop­u­lar ­over the ­past few ­years, how­ev­er, the phys­io­log­i­cal ­basis for ­using BR ­remains ­unclear. We ­have exam­ined wheth­er alter­a­tion in ­nasal ven­ti­la­tion ­would influ­ence the meta­bol­ic ­cost of sub­max­i­mal run­ning.
Meth­ods. Meta­bol­ic ­cost was esti­mat­ed in 10 ­male endu­rance tri­ath­letes by meas­ur­ing ­heart ­rate (HR) and exer­cise per­cep­tion by meas­ur­ing the ­rate of per­ceived exer­tion (RPE) dur­ing sub­max­i­mal ­field run­ning. The pro­to­col con­sist­ed of 5 min of run­ning at 80% of ­their max­i­mal aero­bic veloc­ity (­MAVf, pre­vi­ous­ly deter­mined ­under ­field con­di­tions) for ­three ran­dom­ised experi­men­tal con­di­tions, sep­ar­at­ed by a 10 min ­rest. The con­di­tions ­were nor­mal ­nasal ven­ti­la­tion (N), no ­nasal ven­ti­la­tion (­using a ­nose ­clip) (NC) and ­with a BR.
­Results. Run­ning ­with the BR or ­with NC did not sig­nif­i­cant­ly influ­ence HR (N: 173±7, BR: 173±8, NC: 172±7 ­beat·min-1; F=0.01, p=0.99) or RPE (N: 12.1±1.7, BR: 11.8±1.9, NC: 13.2±0.8; F=1.88, p=0.18). We con­clude ­that alter­a­tion in ­nasal ven­ti­la­tion pro­duced by ­using BR or NC do not influ­ence HR or RPE in a ­group of tri­ath­letes run­ning 5 min at 80% of ­MAVf.
Con­clu­sions. The ­present ­study tend­ed to dem­on­strate ­that ­both ­nasal ven­ti­la­tion ­would not influ­ence the ­total meta­bol­ic ­cost, and ­that the BR ­device is not advan­ta­geous dur­ing ­high inten­sity exer­cise.

inizio pagina

Publication History

Per citare questo articolo

Corresponding author e-mail