The Effects of Expiratory Muscle Strength Training on Run Performance in Healthy College Students

Abstract

PurposeExpiratory muscle strength training (EMST) is a novel and noninvasive intervention to improve expiratory capacity. EMST programs have been shown to benefit individuals who have difficulty breathing, swallowing, and coughing by improving expiratory muscle strength. However, it is unclear if EMST can benefit those without impaired respiratory capacity. Thus, the purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of EMST on run performance in healthy college students.MethodsThis was a repeated measure study design in which participants performed body composition, maximal expiratory pressure (PEmax), VO2max, and 5K run time before and after 4‐weeks of training. In addition, blood samples were obtained immediately before and after the 5K to measure lactic acid, glucose, and epinephrine. Twenty‐one college students were recruited and matched, based on their pre‐VO2max, into 1 of 3 treatment groups (n=7 for each): 1) EMST, 2) aerobic training (AT), or 3) EMST‐AT (combined EMST and aerobic training). EMST was performed 5 d/wk starting at 75% PEmax and progressively increased the resistance throughout the 4‐weeks. AT was performed 4 d/wk for 4‐weeks by progressively increasing run volume up to 5K. EMST‐AT performed both interventions.ResultsThere were no differences among treatment groups for the pre‐measurements. Body composition did not significantly change throughout the study. After 4‐weeks of training all groups improved PEmax, VO2max, and 5K run time. However, the improvement in PEmax was significantly greater for both EMST and EMST‐AT compared to AT. Although there was a trend for improved VO2max and 5K run time for AT and EMST‐AT compared to EMST, the differences were not statistically significant. There were no differences found for the blood variables among treatment groups.ConclusionEMST appears to provide similar benefits to that of short‐term aerobic training in healthy college students. However, the long‐term benefits of EMST compared to aerobic training warrant further investigation.Support or Funding InformationThis study was funded, in part, by a Research Scholarship and Creative Activities (RSCA) grant from California State University, Stanislaus.This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2019 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal.