Repeat application of ischemic preconditioning improves maximal 1,000-m kayak ergometer performance in a simulated competition format

Author Identifier

Marc Sim

ORCID : 0000-0001-5166-0605

Document Type

Journal Article

Publication Title

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Publisher

National Strength and Conditioning Association

School

School of Medical and Health Sciences / Institute for Nutrition Research

RAS ID

31633

Funders

Australian Institute of Sport

Comments

Halley, S. L., Peeling, P., Brown, H., Sim, M., Mallabone, J., Dawson, B., & Binnie, M. J. (2020). Repeat application of ischemic preconditioning improves maximal 1,000-m kayak ergometer performance in a simulated competition format. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000003748

Abstract

Halley, SL, Peeling, P, Brown, H, Sim, M, Mallabone, J, Dawson, B, and Binnie, MJ. Repeat application of ischemic preconditioning improves maximal 1,000-m kayak ergometer performance in a simulated competition format. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000–000, 2020—This study examined the effects of ischemic preconditioning (IPC) on repeat 1,000-m kayak ergometer time-trial (TT) performance, completed in a simulated competition format. Eight well-trained male kayak athletes performed 3 experimental trials, each consisting of two 1,000-m TTs separated by 80 minutes (TT 1 and TT 2). Trials included; (a) IPC (4 × 5 minutes 220 mm Hg alternating bilateral leg occlusion) 40 minutes before TT 1 only (IPC1); (b) IPC 40 minutes before TT 1 and 20 minutes before TT 2 (IPC2); and (c) no IPC (CON). Time, power, stroke rate, and expired gas variables (V[Combining Dot Above]O2 and accumulated oxygen deficit) were measured throughout each TT; blood gas variables (blood lactate, partial pressure of oxygen and blood pH) and rating of perceived exertion were measured before and after each effort. Physiological, perceptual, and physical measures were analyzed via a repeated measures analysis of variance with the level of significance set at p ≤ 0.05. There were large improvements in completion time for TT 1 in IPC1 (d = 1.24 ± 0.68, p < 0.05) and IPC2 (d = 1.53 ± 0.99, p < 0.05) versus CON. There was also a large improvement in TT 2 completion time in IPC2 versus CON (d = 1.26 ± 1.13, p = 0.03) whereas, IPC1 and CON were indifferent (d = 0.3 ± 0.54, p = 0.23). This study showed that a repeat application of IPC in a simulated competition format may offer further benefit in comparison to a single pre-exercise application of IPC.

DOI

10.1519/JSC.0000000000003748

Access Rights

subscription content

Share

 
COinS