The effect of precooling on moderately trained female rowers in the heat Essay Example

by Hessmer ( 1984 ) showed that a cold air exposure method of precooling has been good to Performance, there are restrictions to the cold air exposure method in footings of practical application. A normally used method of precooling has been H2O egress, it has been identified as the ‘Gold Standard’ by Casa et Al. ( 2007 ) nevertheless once more has restrictions in footings of practical application. Iced waistcoats have been used often as a method of precooling, the usage of ice waistcoats has been shown to better public presentation in Rowing ( Yates et al. , 1996 ) , Cycling ( Smith et al. , 1997 ) and Running ( Arngrimsson et al. , 2004 ) . The usage of ice waistcoat could be more applicable in pattern as they allow jocks to precool whilst traveling through their normal readying for exercising.

A big sum of research in this country has been focused on how precooling effects public presentation of drawn-out submaximal exercising. This research has shown that a assortment of precooling methods have been good to the public presentation of this type of exercising. However less established are the benefits of precooling before higher strength and shorter continuance activities. Rowing is a athletics that involves high strength shorter continuance exercising, small research has been conducted on the consequence of precooling on rowing, peculiarly female oarsmans.

Alternate Hypothesis ( H1 ) : Precooling has an consequence on reasonably trained female oarsmans 1500m clip test public presentation in the heat.

Null Hypothesis ( H0 ) : Precooling has no consequence on reasonably trained female oarsmans 1500m clip test public presentation in the heat.

Methods

Participants

5 Reasonably trained female oarsmans

from Kingston University took portion in the survey, average age 21.6 (±1.14 ) , average stature 172.8 centimeter ( ±6.33 ) and average mass 65.4 Kg ( ±4.74 ) .

Experimental Design

This survey used a randomized crossing over design, in which the consequence of precooling was tested against a control of no precooling.

Experimental Procedure

The process was explained to the participants in item, informed consent was gained and a PARQ was filled out.

The participants stature and mass were recorded utilizing a floor stadiometer ( Holtain Ltd. , Dyfed, Wales. ) and electronic graduated tables ( Seca, Vogel & A ; Halke, Germany. )

Temperature investigations ( YSI Temperature Probes, Yellow Springs Instruments, Ohio, USA. ) were attached to the four chosen sites ; the breastbone, the right forearm, and the right thigh. The bosom rate proctor ( Polar F6, FT1 & A ; RS400, Polar Electro Oy, Kempele, Finland. ) was besides put on the participant.

The participants so entered the Heat Chamber set at 30⁰C and 60 % humidness and Saturday on the rowing dynamometer ( Concept II Inc, Morrisville, VT, 05661, USA. ) The Temperature investigations were so attached to the Squirrel SQ2020 Data Logger ( Grant Instruments ( Cambridge ) Ltd. ) and computing machine. At this point ( upon entry to the chamber ) several measurings were taken ; skin temperature ( Tsk ) utilizing the temperature investigation and informations lumberman mentioned antecedently, Tc utilizing FirstTemp Genius ( Sherwood Medical, Crawley Sussex, RH11 7YQ, UK. ) , Heart Rate ( HR ) utilizing the Polar F6, FT1 & A ; RS400 ( Polar Electro Oy, Kempele, Finland. ) , blood was besides taken so that

Blood Lactate ( LT ) could be analysed subsequently utilizing Biosen C-Line Sport ( EKF diagnostic Gross saless GmbH, Ebendorfer Chaussee 3, Technologiepark Ostfalen, Germany. ) The participants were so required to sit still on the Rowing Ergometer for 15 proceedingss. For the precooling status during this clip the participant was being cooled have oning an ice waistcoat ( Chilla Coolong Vest, Chilla, ( NZ ) Ltd. Auckland, New Zealand. ) which was changed every 5 proceedingss. Drag factor was so set at 130 or 125 depending on the participants weight class and a 5 minute warm up at rate 20 began. For the precooling status an ice waistcoat was worn for the warm up. After the warm up the ice waistcoat was removed and several measurings were taken ; Tsk, Tc, LT and HR.

The participant was so asked to fix for the clip test. The 1500m Trial was so started with bids ‘come forward’ and ‘go’ the participants were provided with verbal encouragement throughout. At the terminal of the clip test several measurings were taken ; Tsk, Tc, LT and HR. The entire clip to finish the clip test was recorded.

The participants were required to finish this process twice one time in the precooling status ( PreC ) and one time in the control status ( CC ) , these two trials were completed at least 4 yearss apart.

Equipment List

Biosen C-Line Sport ( EKF diagnostic Gross saless GmbH, Ebendorfer Chaussee 3, Technologiepark Ostfalen, Germany. )

Chilla Coolong Vest ( Chilla, ( NZ ) Ltd. Auckland, New Zealand. )

Electronic Scales ( Seca, Vogel & A ; Halke, Germany. )

FirstTemp Genius ( Sherwood Medical, Crawley Sussex, RH11

7YQ, UK. )

Floor Stadiometer ( Holtain Ltd. , Dyfed, Wales. )

Kingston University Heat Chamber

Polar F6, FT1 & A ; RS400 ( Polar Electro Oy, Kempele, Finland. )

Rowing Ergometer ( Concept II Inc, Morrisville, VT, 05661, USA. )

Squirrel SQ2020 Data Logger ( Grant Instruments ( Cambridge ) Ltd. )

YSI Temperature Probes ( Yellow Springs Instruments, Ohio, USA. )

Datas Analysis

SPSS ( IBM Corp. Released 2012. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 21.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp. ) was used to execute the information analysis.

Exploratory informations analysis was performed and box secret plans created, so that outliers were removed from the informations. After the information was found to be parametric.

Interferential statistical analysis was so performed to prove the hypotheses. A mated t-test was used to prove for difference between PreC and ConC for the Mean clip test clip. Repeated steps ANOVAs were used to prove the physiological variables ; Tsk, Tc, HR and LT. Post hoc trials were paired t-tests, a rectification was applied ( 0.5/3 ( the figure of perennial steps ) ) , to avoid statistical mistake. A significance was detected utilizing P & lt ; 0.016.

Consequences

There was no important difference in average clip for the PreC ( M= 353.38, SD= ±19.79 ) and ConC ( M=354.7, SD= ±18.75 ) as illustrated in fig. 1, T ( 4 ) = -0.898, P = 0.420. These consequences suggested the PreC decreased the clip required to finish the 1500m clip test but non significantly.

The perennial step ANOVA showed no important difference between the conditions. Paired t-tests found no important difference at the measuring times, as illustrated in fig.2.

Start of proving. PreC ( M= 36.1, SD= ±0.83 ) and

ConC ( M=36.5, SD= ±0.95 ) , t ( 4 ) = -1.234, P = 0.285, bespeaking the precooling Tc was non significantly lower.

End of warm up. PreC ( M= 36.92, SD= ±0.51 ) and ConC ( M=36.84, SD= ±0.98 ) , t ( 4 ) = 0.251, P = 0.814, bespeaking the PreC Tc was non significantly higher.

End of proving. PreC ( M= 37.3, SD= ±0.45 ) and ConC ( M=36.46, SD= ±0.54 ) , t ( 4 ) = -0.718, P = 0.512, bespeaking the PreC Tc was non significantly lower.

The perennial steps ANOVA showed no important difference between the conditions for breastbone Tsk. Paired t-tests found no important difference at the measuring times, as illustrated in fig. 3.

Start of proving. PreC ( M= 35.18, SD= ±1.36 ) and ConC ( M=34.77, SD= ±1.31 ) , t ( 4 ) = 0.432, P = 0.688, bespeaking the PreC breastbone Tsk was non significantly higher.

End of warm up. PreC ( M= 32.51, SD= ±1.13 ) and ConC ( M=34.93, SD= ±1.21 ) , t ( 4 ) = -3.044, P = 0.038, bespeaking the PreC breastbone Tsk was non significantly lower.

End of proving. PreC ( M= 32.57, SD= ±1.19 ) and ConC ( M=33.21, SD= ±1.17 ) , t ( 4 ) = -0.906, P = 0.416, bespeaking the PreC breastbone Tsk was non significantly lower.

The perennial steps ANOVA showed no important difference between the conditions for forearm Tsk. Paired t-tests found no important difference at the measuring times, as illustrated in fig.4.

Start of proving. PreC ( M= 32.34, SD= ±0.86 ) and ConC ( M=33.17, SD= ±1.18 ) , t ( 4 )

= -1.354, P = 0.247, bespeaking the PreC forearm Tsk was non significantly lower.

End of warm up. PreC ( M= 33.32, SD= ±0.31 ) and ConC ( M=33.89, SD= ±0.63 ) , t ( 4 ) = -1.543 P = 0.198, bespeaking the PreC forearm Tsk was non significantly lower.

End of proving. PreC ( M= 32.57, SD= ±0.41 ) and ConC ( M=33.1, SD= ±0.1 ) , t ( 4 ) = -1.1797, P = 0.214, bespeaking the PreC forearm Tsk was non significantly lower.

The perennial steps ANOVA showed no important difference between the conditions for thigh Tsk. Paired t-tests found no important difference at the measuring times, as illustrated in in fig.5.

Start of proving. PreC ( M= 32.00, SD= ±1.01 ) and ConC ( M=32.22, SD= ±1.26 ) , t ( 4 ) = -0.416, P = 0.699, bespeaking the PreC thigh Tsk was non significantly lower.

End of warm up. PreC ( M= 32.93, SD= ±1.88 ) and ConC ( M=32.94, SD= ±1.15 ) , t ( 4 ) = -0.012 P = 0.991, bespeaking the PreC thigh Tsk was non significantly lower.

End of proving. PreC ( M= 32.61, SD= ±0.78 ) and ConC ( M=32.38, SD= ±0.74 ) , t ( 4 ) = 0.463, P = 0.668, bespeaking the PreC thigh Tsk was non significantly higher.

The perennial steps ANOVA showed no important difference between conditions for HR. Paired t-tests found no important difference at the measuring times, as illustrated in fig.6.

Start of proving. PreC ( M= 92.8, SD= ±16.25 ) and ConC ( M=68.8, SD= ±36.22 ) , t ( 4 ) = 1.124, P = 0.324, bespeaking the PreC HR was

non significantly higher.

End of warm up. PreC ( M= 144.4, SD= ±14.26 ) and ConC ( M=151.6, SD= ±19.71 ) , t ( 4 ) = -0.770 P = 0.484, bespeaking the PreC HR was non significantly lower.

End of proving. PreC ( M= 193.4, SD= ±3.78 ) and ConC ( M=193.6, SD= ±2.7 ) , t ( 4 ) = -0.085, P = 0.936, bespeaking the PreC HR was non significantly lower.

The perennial steps ANOVA showed no important difference between conditions for LT. Paired t-tests found no important difference at the measuring times, as illustrated in fig. 7.

Start of proving. PreC ( M= 1.84, SD= ±0.58 ) and ConC ( M=1.70, SD= ±0.87 ) , t ( 4 ) = 0.309, P = 0.773, bespeaking the PreC LT was non significantly higher.

End of warm up. PreC ( M= 2.17, SD= ±1.16 ) and ConC ( M=3.99, SD= ±2.05 ) , t ( 4 ) = -2.903 P = 0.044, bespeaking the PreC LT was non significantly lower.

End of proving. PreC ( M= 13.73, SD= ±2.92 ) and ConC ( M=13.84, SD= ±2.34 ) , t ( 4 ) = -0.094, P = 0.930, bespeaking the PreC LT was non significantly lower.

Discussion

The chief findings of this survey was that the PreC had no important consequence on public presentation, although it did somewhat cut down the mean clip taken to finish the 1500m clip test ( see figure 1 ) , nor did it significantly affect any of the physiological variables ; Tc, Tsk, HR and LT.

In a comparatively similar survey by Yates et Al. ( 1996 ) precooling with an ice waistcoat for 30 mins was

found to better the rowing public presentation of well-trained competitory oarsmans in 32^OC and 60 % humidness. This contradicts our findings in footings of public presentation, nevertheless similar findings were found in footings of some physiological variables. As in this survey Yates et al. ( 1996 ) found no important difference in Tsk, LT or HR but did happen that Tc was reduced. The cardinal differences between this survey and the Yates et Al. ( 1996 ) survey and this 1 could be the about of clip the participants were precooled and the distance of the clip test, these differences could account for the deficiency of understanding in footings of the public presentation and Tc findings. The shorter 20 min precooling in this survey could be why no difference Tc was seen as it may non hold been a long adequate period to efficaciously cut down Tc and it could be proposed that this is why public presentation wasn’t enhanced.

Another survey of a 6 minute maximum row at 30^OC by Myler et Al. ( 1989 ) besides found public presentation to be improved after PreC, they besides found that Tc, Tsk and HR were all significantly reduced which once more contrasts our findings despite similar conditions being used. Myler et Al ( 1989 ) used a different method of precooling utilizing 5 min intermittent applications of iced jammed towels, a precursor to the modern ice waistcoats. This intermittent methods may be more effectual at cut downing Tc and Tsk this could potentially explicate the differences in findings.

Johnson et Al. ( 2008, in Ross et al. , 2013 ) found that trained bicyclers 20km clip test

public presentations public presentation were improved in 30^OC after 65 mins precooling. This once more contradicts our consequences with a important betterment in public presentation after precooling it farther contradicts our consequences in that Tc was besides significantly reduced. The long period of precooling may once more account for these differences. Previous research has besides by and large found that precooling can better public presentation of drawn-out exercising and the 20km rhythm is far more prolong exercising than the 1500m clip test in our survey.

A chief restriction of this survey is that there was a sample of merely 5 participants and that the participants were from both the unfastened and lightweight weight categories. A farther Restriction of this survey was whether the precooling method used is applicable in pattern for competitions, as precooling utilizing ice waistcoats during a warm up in rowing would necessitate the ice waistcoats to be transporting in the boats during rushing this extra weight could be a hinderance to public presentation.

Decision and Recommendations

It could be concluded that precooling had no important consequence on reasonably trained female oarsmans 1500m clip tests in the heat.

Further research could be conducted into more applicable methods of precooling, and cut downing Tc possibly the consequence of ice waistcoat precooling before the warm up the internal chilling, possibly in the signifier of an ice drink during the warm up and before public presentation.

Mentions

1. Arngrimsson SA, Petitt DS, Stueck MG, Jorgensen DK, and Cureton KJ ( 2004 ) Cooling vest worn during active warm-up improves 5-km tally public presentation in the heat.Journal of AppliedPhysiolology96 ( 5 ) :1867–74.
2. Casa DJ, McDermott BP, Lee EC, Yeargin SW, Armstrong LE,
   

Maresh CM ( 2007 ) Cold H2O submergence: the gilded criterion for exertional heat hyperpyrexia intervention.Exercise SportScience Review. 35 ( 3 ) :141–9

J, Yates K, Lee H, Thompson MW, Holcombe BV, Martin DT ( 1997 ) . Pre-cooling improves cycling public presentation in hot/humid conditions [ Abstract ] .Medicine and Science inSports and Exercise29, S263