Home > Journals > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness > Past Issues > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2015 November;55(11) > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2015 November;55(11):1407-15

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
To subscribe
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Reprints
Permissions
Cite this article as

 

  OTHER AREAS 

The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2015 November;55(11):1407-15

Copyright © 2015 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Perceptual and cerebro-spinal responses to graded innocuous and noxious stimuli following aerobic exercise

Micalos P. S. 1, Harris J. 2, Drinkwater E. J. 3, Cannon J. 4, Marino F. E. 4

1 School of Biomedical Sciences, Charles Sturt University, Bathurst, Australia; 2 School of Psychology, Charles Sturt University, Bathurst, Australia; 3 School of Exercise and Health Sciences, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, Australia; 4 School of Human Movement Studies, Charles Sturt University, Panorama Ave, Bathurst, Australia


PDF


AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of aerobic exercise on perceptual and cerebro-spinal responses to graded electrocutaneous stimuli.
METHODS: The design comprised 2 x 30 min of cycling exercise at 30% and 70% of peak oxygen consumption (VO2 peak) on separate occasions in a counter-balanced order in 10 healthy participants. Assessment of nociceptive withdrawal reflex threshold (NWR-T), pain threshold (PT), and somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs) to graded electrocutaneous stimuli were performed before and after exercise. Perceptual magnitude ratings and SEPs were compared at 30%PT, 60%PT, 100%PT before (Pre), 5 min after (Post1), and 15 min after (Post2) aerobic exercise.
RESULTS: There was no difference in the NWR-T and the PT following exercise at 30% and 70% of VO2 peak. ANOVA for the perceptual response within pooled electrocutaneous stimuli show a significant main effect for time (F2,18=5.41, P=0.01) but no difference for exercise intensity (F1,9=0.02, P=0.88). Within-subject contrasts reveal trend differences between 30%PT and 100%PT for Pre-Post1 (P=0.09) and Pre-Post2 (P=0.02). ANOVA for the SEPs peak-to-peak signal amplitude (N1-P1) show significant main effect for time (F2,18=4.04, P=0.04) but no difference for exercise intensity (F1,9=1.83, P=0.21). Pairwise comparisons for time reveal differences between Pre-Post1 (P=0.06) and Pre-Post2 (P=0.01). There was a significant interaction for SEPs N1-P1 between exercise intensity and stimulus intensity (F2,18=3.56, P=0.05).
CONCLUSION: These results indicate that aerobic exercise did not increase the electrocutaneous threshold for pain and the NWR-T. Aerobic exercise attenuated perceptual responses to innocuous stimuli and SEPs N1-P1 response to noxious stimuli.

top of page