Is there an optimal ischemic-preconditioning dose to improve cycling performance?

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Standard

Is there an optimal ischemic-preconditioning dose to improve cycling performance? / Cocking, Scott; Wilson, Mathew G.; Nichols, David; Cable, N. Timothy; Green, Daniel J.; Thijssen, Dick H.J.; Jones, Helen.

In: International journal of sports physiology and performance, Vol. 13, No. 3, 01.03.2018, p. 274-282.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Cocking, Scott ; Wilson, Mathew G. ; Nichols, David ; Cable, N. Timothy ; Green, Daniel J. ; Thijssen, Dick H.J. ; Jones, Helen. / Is there an optimal ischemic-preconditioning dose to improve cycling performance?. In: International journal of sports physiology and performance. 2018 ; Vol. 13, No. 3. pp. 274-282.

Bibtex

@article{1e0d7b34fdf244099ed97e91f0a34651,
title = "Is there an optimal ischemic-preconditioning dose to improve cycling performance?",
abstract = "Introduction: Ischemic preconditioning (IPC) may enhance endurance performance. No previous study has directly compared distinct IPC protocols for optimal benefit. Purpose: To determine whether a specific IPC protocol (ie, number of cycles, amount of muscle tissue, and local vs remote occlusion) elicits greater performance outcomes. Methods: Twelve cyclists performed 5 different IPC protocols 30 min before a blinded 375-kJ cycling time trial (TT) in a laboratory. Responses to traditional IPC (4 × 5-min legs) were compared with those to 8 × 5-min legs and sham (dose cycles), 4 × 5-min unilateral legs (dose tissue), and 4 × 5-min arms (remote). Rating of perceived exertion and blood lactate were recorded at each 25% TT completion. Power (W), heart rate (beats/min), and oxygen uptake (V O2) (mL kg-1 min-1) were measured continuously throughout TTs. Magnitudebased-inference statistics were employed to compare variable differences to the minimal practically important difference. Results: Traditional IPC was associated with a 17-s (0, 34) faster TT time than sham. Applying more dose cycles (8 × 5 min) had no impact on performance. Traditional IPC was associated with likely trivial higher blood lactate and possibly beneficial lower V O2 responses vs sham. Unilateral IPC was associated with 18-s (-11, 48) slower performance than bilateral (dose tissue). TT times after remote and local IPC were not different (0 [-16, 16] s). Conclusion: The traditional 4 × 5-min (local or remote) IPC stimulus resulted in the fastest TT time compared with sham; there was no benefit of applying a greater number of cycles or employing unilateral IPC.",
keywords = "Endurance, Exercise, Ischemia, Occlusion, Time trial",
author = "Scott Cocking and Wilson, {Mathew G.} and David Nichols and Cable, {N. Timothy} and Green, {Daniel J.} and Thijssen, {Dick H.J.} and Helen Jones",
year = "2018",
month = mar,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1123/ijspp.2017-0114",
language = "English",
volume = "13",
pages = "274--282",
journal = "International journal of sports physiology and performance",
issn = "1555-0265",
publisher = "Human Kinetics",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Is there an optimal ischemic-preconditioning dose to improve cycling performance?

AU - Cocking, Scott

AU - Wilson, Mathew G.

AU - Nichols, David

AU - Cable, N. Timothy

AU - Green, Daniel J.

AU - Thijssen, Dick H.J.

AU - Jones, Helen

PY - 2018/3/1

Y1 - 2018/3/1

N2 - Introduction: Ischemic preconditioning (IPC) may enhance endurance performance. No previous study has directly compared distinct IPC protocols for optimal benefit. Purpose: To determine whether a specific IPC protocol (ie, number of cycles, amount of muscle tissue, and local vs remote occlusion) elicits greater performance outcomes. Methods: Twelve cyclists performed 5 different IPC protocols 30 min before a blinded 375-kJ cycling time trial (TT) in a laboratory. Responses to traditional IPC (4 × 5-min legs) were compared with those to 8 × 5-min legs and sham (dose cycles), 4 × 5-min unilateral legs (dose tissue), and 4 × 5-min arms (remote). Rating of perceived exertion and blood lactate were recorded at each 25% TT completion. Power (W), heart rate (beats/min), and oxygen uptake (V O2) (mL kg-1 min-1) were measured continuously throughout TTs. Magnitudebased-inference statistics were employed to compare variable differences to the minimal practically important difference. Results: Traditional IPC was associated with a 17-s (0, 34) faster TT time than sham. Applying more dose cycles (8 × 5 min) had no impact on performance. Traditional IPC was associated with likely trivial higher blood lactate and possibly beneficial lower V O2 responses vs sham. Unilateral IPC was associated with 18-s (-11, 48) slower performance than bilateral (dose tissue). TT times after remote and local IPC were not different (0 [-16, 16] s). Conclusion: The traditional 4 × 5-min (local or remote) IPC stimulus resulted in the fastest TT time compared with sham; there was no benefit of applying a greater number of cycles or employing unilateral IPC.

AB - Introduction: Ischemic preconditioning (IPC) may enhance endurance performance. No previous study has directly compared distinct IPC protocols for optimal benefit. Purpose: To determine whether a specific IPC protocol (ie, number of cycles, amount of muscle tissue, and local vs remote occlusion) elicits greater performance outcomes. Methods: Twelve cyclists performed 5 different IPC protocols 30 min before a blinded 375-kJ cycling time trial (TT) in a laboratory. Responses to traditional IPC (4 × 5-min legs) were compared with those to 8 × 5-min legs and sham (dose cycles), 4 × 5-min unilateral legs (dose tissue), and 4 × 5-min arms (remote). Rating of perceived exertion and blood lactate were recorded at each 25% TT completion. Power (W), heart rate (beats/min), and oxygen uptake (V O2) (mL kg-1 min-1) were measured continuously throughout TTs. Magnitudebased-inference statistics were employed to compare variable differences to the minimal practically important difference. Results: Traditional IPC was associated with a 17-s (0, 34) faster TT time than sham. Applying more dose cycles (8 × 5 min) had no impact on performance. Traditional IPC was associated with likely trivial higher blood lactate and possibly beneficial lower V O2 responses vs sham. Unilateral IPC was associated with 18-s (-11, 48) slower performance than bilateral (dose tissue). TT times after remote and local IPC were not different (0 [-16, 16] s). Conclusion: The traditional 4 × 5-min (local or remote) IPC stimulus resulted in the fastest TT time compared with sham; there was no benefit of applying a greater number of cycles or employing unilateral IPC.

KW - Endurance

KW - Exercise

KW - Ischemia

KW - Occlusion

KW - Time trial

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85044863899&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk/6811/

U2 - 10.1123/ijspp.2017-0114

DO - 10.1123/ijspp.2017-0114

M3 - Article

C2 - 28657799

AN - SCOPUS:85044863899

VL - 13

SP - 274

EP - 282

JO - International journal of sports physiology and performance

JF - International journal of sports physiology and performance

SN - 1555-0265

IS - 3

ER -