Abstract

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to determine whether cycling time trial (TT) performance differs between hypobaric hypoxia (HH) and normobaric hypoxia (NH) at the same ambient PO2 (93 mmHg, 4,300-m altitude equivalent).MethodsTwo groups of healthy fit men were matched on physical performance and demographic characteristics and completed a 720-kJ time trial on a cycle ergometer at sea level (SL) and following approximately 2 h of resting exposure to either HH (n = 6, 20 ± 2 years, 75.2 ± 11.8 kg, mean ± SD) or NH (n = 6, 21 ± 3 years, 77.4 ± 8.8 kg). Volunteers were free to manually increase or decrease the work rate on the cycle ergometer. Heart rate (HR), arterial oxygen saturation (SaO2), and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) were collected every 5 min during the TT, and the mean was calculated.ResultsBoth groups exhibited similar TT performance (min) at SL (73.9 ± 7.6 vs. 73.2 ± 8.2), but TT performance was longer (P < 0.05) in HH (121.0 ± 12.1) compared to NH (99.5 ± 18.1). The percent decrement in TT performance from SL to HH (65.1 ± 23.6%) was greater (P < 0.05) than that from SL to NH (35.5 ± 13.7%). The mean exercise SaO2, HR, and RPE during the TT were not different in HH compared to NH.ConclusionCycling time trial performance is impaired to a greater degree in HH versus NH at the same ambient PO2 equivalent to 4,300 m despite similar cardiorespiratory responses.

Highlights

  • The purpose of this study was to determine whether cycling time trial (TT) performance differs between hypobaric hypoxia (HH) and normobaric hypoxia (NH) at the same ambient Ambient PO2 (PO2) (93 mmHg, 4,300-m altitude equivalent)

  • One meta-analysis suggested that live-high, train-low protocols conducted in HH were more effective for enhancing sea-level endurance performance than live-high, train-low protocols conducted in NH [10]

  • The purpose of this study was to determine in two groups of men, matched on physical performance and demographic characteristics, whether cycling time trial (TT) performance differs during an acute exposure to HH and NH at the same ambient PO2 (93 mmHg, 4,300-m altitude equivalent)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to determine whether cycling time trial (TT) performance differs between hypobaric hypoxia (HH) and normobaric hypoxia (NH) at the same ambient PO2 (93 mmHg, 4,300-m altitude equivalent). One meta-analysis suggested that live-high, train-low protocols conducted in HH were more effective for enhancing sea-level endurance performance than live-high, train-low protocols conducted in NH [10]. A review suggested that repeated exposures to HH or NH conditions resulted in distinctly different endurance performance outcomes during subsequent exposure to terrestrial altitude [8]. These reviews [8,10]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call