Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35780133›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Effects of different inspiratory muscle warm-up loads on mechanical, physiological and muscle oxygenation responses during high-intensity running and recovery.

Anita B Marostegan, Claudio A Gobatto, Felipe M Rasteiro, Charlini S Hartz, Marlene A Moreno, Fúlvia B Manchado-Gobatto

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Anita B MarosteganLaboratory of Applied Sport Physiology, School of Applied Sciences, University of Campinas, Limeira, São Paulo, Brazil.
Claudio A GobattoLaboratory of Applied Sport Physiology, School of Applied Sciences, University of Campinas, Limeira, São Paulo, Brazil.
Felipe M RasteiroLaboratory of Applied Sport Physiology, School of Applied Sciences, University of Campinas, Limeira, São Paulo, Brazil.
Charlini S HartzPostgraduate Program in Human Movement Sciences, Methodist University of Piracicaba, Piracicaba, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Marlene A MorenoPostgraduate Program in Human Movement Sciences, Methodist University of Piracicaba, Piracicaba, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Fúlvia B Manchado-GobattoLaboratory of Applied Sport Physiology, School of Applied Sciences, University of Campinas, Limeira, São Paulo, Brazil.
Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) · BRMethodist University of Piracicaba · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Inspiratory muscle warm-up (IMW) has been used as a resource to enhance exercises and sports performance. However, there is a lack of studies in the literature addressing the effects of different IMW loads (especially in combination with a shorter and applicable protocol) on high-intensity running and recovery phase. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the effects of three different IMW loads using a shorter protocol on mechanical, physiological and muscle oxygenation responses during and after high-intensity running exercise. Sixteen physically active men, randomly performed four trials 30 s all-out run, preceded by the shorter IMW protocol (2 × 15 breaths with a 1-min rest interval between sets, accomplished 2 min before the 30 s all-out run). Here, three IMW load conditions were used: 15%, 40%, and 60% of maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP), plus a control session (CON) without the IMW. The force, velocity and running power were measured (1000 Hz). Two near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) devices measured (10 Hz) the muscle's oxygenation responses in biceps brachii (BB) and vastus lateralis (VL). Additionally, heart rate (HR) and blood lactate ([Lac]) were also monitored. IMW loads applied with a shorter protocol promoted a significant increase in mean and minimum running power as well as in peak and minimum force compared to CON. In addition, specific IMW loads led to higher values of peak power, mean velocity (60% of MIP) and mean force (40 and 60% of MIP) in relation to CON. Physiological responses (HR and muscles oxygenation) were not modified by any IMW during exercise, as well as HR and [Lac] in the recovery phase. On the other hand, 40% of MIP presented a higher tissue saturation index (TSI) for BB during recovery phase. In conclusion, the use of different loads of IMW may improve the performance of a physically active individual in a 30 s all-out run, as verified by the increased peak, mean and minimum mechanical values, but not in performance assessed second by second. In addition, 40% of the MIP improves TSI of the BB during the recovery phase, which can indicate greater availability of O

Indexed as

Athletic PerformanceRunningWarm-Up ExerciseHumansLactatesMaleRespiratory MusclesLactates

Identifiers

PMID35780133
PMCPMC9250525
OpenAlexW4283771210

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.