Comparison of Lower- vs. Upper-Body Cooling during Arm Exercise in Hot Conditions

Michael J. Price, Mark I. Mather

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    13 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Introduction: Studies examining cooling strategies and exercise have generally employed lower-body exercise despite the fact that arm exercise is an important mode for many industrial tasks and disabled populations. The aim of this study was to determine the effects of two cooling strategies during arm exercise in the heat. Methods: There were eight male subjects (mean ± SD age 24.5 ± 4.0 yr, weight 81.0 ± 7.8 kg, upper-body V̇o 2peak 3.13 ± 0.50 L · min-1) who volunteered for this study. Subjects undertook arm crank exercise for 30 min (50% V̇o2peak) in a hot environment (40.2 ± 0.4°C, 38.7 ± 7.4% RH) on three occasions (no cooling control, CON; lower-body cooling, LC; upper-body cooling, UC). Results: No differences were observed between trials for oxygen consumption, respiratory exchange rate (RER), or blood lactate. Heart rate (HR) was greatest during CON (151 ± 11 bpm) when compared with UC and LC (148 ± 16 and 138 ± 13 bpm; p < 0.05). Mean skin temperature was warmer during CON (36.3 ± 0.5°C) when compared with UC (31.2 ± 1.4°C, p < 0.05), which was warmer than during LC (28.5 ± 1.3°C, p < 0.05). No differences were observed for rectal or aural temperatures between trials. At the end of exercise, heat storage was hyperthermic (3.04 ± 0.68 J · g -1), thermoneutral (0.18 ± 1.21 J · g-1), and hypothermic (-2.37 ± 0.81 J · g-4) during CON, UC, and LC, respectively (p < 0.05). Perceived exertion was lowest during LC and greatest during CON (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that cooling the lower body during arm exercise in hot conditions is more effective in reducing physiological and thermal strain than cooling the upper body.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)220-226
    Number of pages7
    JournalAviation Space and Environmental Medicine
    Volume75
    Issue number3
    Publication statusPublished - 3 Mar 2004

    Fingerprint

    Hot Temperature
    Skin Temperature
    Respiratory Rate
    Oxygen Consumption
    Ear
    Lactic Acid
    Heart Rate
    Weights and Measures
    Temperature
    Population

    Keywords

    • Aural temperature
    • Cooling
    • Heat storage
    • Ice packs
    • Rectal temperature
    • Skin temperature
    • Upper-body exercise

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

    Cite this

    Comparison of Lower- vs. Upper-Body Cooling during Arm Exercise in Hot Conditions. / Price, Michael J.; Mather, Mark I.

    In: Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, Vol. 75, No. 3 , 03.03.2004, p. 220-226.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    @article{9e84b9b6017e492db3621f93bf96b084,
    title = "Comparison of Lower- vs. Upper-Body Cooling during Arm Exercise in Hot Conditions",
    abstract = "Introduction: Studies examining cooling strategies and exercise have generally employed lower-body exercise despite the fact that arm exercise is an important mode for many industrial tasks and disabled populations. The aim of this study was to determine the effects of two cooling strategies during arm exercise in the heat. Methods: There were eight male subjects (mean ± SD age 24.5 ± 4.0 yr, weight 81.0 ± 7.8 kg, upper-body V̇o 2peak 3.13 ± 0.50 L · min-1) who volunteered for this study. Subjects undertook arm crank exercise for 30 min (50{\%} V̇o2peak) in a hot environment (40.2 ± 0.4°C, 38.7 ± 7.4{\%} RH) on three occasions (no cooling control, CON; lower-body cooling, LC; upper-body cooling, UC). Results: No differences were observed between trials for oxygen consumption, respiratory exchange rate (RER), or blood lactate. Heart rate (HR) was greatest during CON (151 ± 11 bpm) when compared with UC and LC (148 ± 16 and 138 ± 13 bpm; p < 0.05). Mean skin temperature was warmer during CON (36.3 ± 0.5°C) when compared with UC (31.2 ± 1.4°C, p < 0.05), which was warmer than during LC (28.5 ± 1.3°C, p < 0.05). No differences were observed for rectal or aural temperatures between trials. At the end of exercise, heat storage was hyperthermic (3.04 ± 0.68 J · g -1), thermoneutral (0.18 ± 1.21 J · g-1), and hypothermic (-2.37 ± 0.81 J · g-4) during CON, UC, and LC, respectively (p < 0.05). Perceived exertion was lowest during LC and greatest during CON (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that cooling the lower body during arm exercise in hot conditions is more effective in reducing physiological and thermal strain than cooling the upper body.",
    keywords = "Aural temperature, Cooling, Heat storage, Ice packs, Rectal temperature, Skin temperature, Upper-body exercise",
    author = "Price, {Michael J.} and Mather, {Mark I.}",
    year = "2004",
    month = "3",
    day = "3",
    language = "English",
    volume = "75",
    pages = "220--226",
    journal = "Aerospace medicine and human performance",
    issn = "2375-6314",
    publisher = "Aerospace Medical Association",
    number = "3",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Comparison of Lower- vs. Upper-Body Cooling during Arm Exercise in Hot Conditions

    AU - Price, Michael J.

    AU - Mather, Mark I.

    PY - 2004/3/3

    Y1 - 2004/3/3

    N2 - Introduction: Studies examining cooling strategies and exercise have generally employed lower-body exercise despite the fact that arm exercise is an important mode for many industrial tasks and disabled populations. The aim of this study was to determine the effects of two cooling strategies during arm exercise in the heat. Methods: There were eight male subjects (mean ± SD age 24.5 ± 4.0 yr, weight 81.0 ± 7.8 kg, upper-body V̇o 2peak 3.13 ± 0.50 L · min-1) who volunteered for this study. Subjects undertook arm crank exercise for 30 min (50% V̇o2peak) in a hot environment (40.2 ± 0.4°C, 38.7 ± 7.4% RH) on three occasions (no cooling control, CON; lower-body cooling, LC; upper-body cooling, UC). Results: No differences were observed between trials for oxygen consumption, respiratory exchange rate (RER), or blood lactate. Heart rate (HR) was greatest during CON (151 ± 11 bpm) when compared with UC and LC (148 ± 16 and 138 ± 13 bpm; p < 0.05). Mean skin temperature was warmer during CON (36.3 ± 0.5°C) when compared with UC (31.2 ± 1.4°C, p < 0.05), which was warmer than during LC (28.5 ± 1.3°C, p < 0.05). No differences were observed for rectal or aural temperatures between trials. At the end of exercise, heat storage was hyperthermic (3.04 ± 0.68 J · g -1), thermoneutral (0.18 ± 1.21 J · g-1), and hypothermic (-2.37 ± 0.81 J · g-4) during CON, UC, and LC, respectively (p < 0.05). Perceived exertion was lowest during LC and greatest during CON (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that cooling the lower body during arm exercise in hot conditions is more effective in reducing physiological and thermal strain than cooling the upper body.

    AB - Introduction: Studies examining cooling strategies and exercise have generally employed lower-body exercise despite the fact that arm exercise is an important mode for many industrial tasks and disabled populations. The aim of this study was to determine the effects of two cooling strategies during arm exercise in the heat. Methods: There were eight male subjects (mean ± SD age 24.5 ± 4.0 yr, weight 81.0 ± 7.8 kg, upper-body V̇o 2peak 3.13 ± 0.50 L · min-1) who volunteered for this study. Subjects undertook arm crank exercise for 30 min (50% V̇o2peak) in a hot environment (40.2 ± 0.4°C, 38.7 ± 7.4% RH) on three occasions (no cooling control, CON; lower-body cooling, LC; upper-body cooling, UC). Results: No differences were observed between trials for oxygen consumption, respiratory exchange rate (RER), or blood lactate. Heart rate (HR) was greatest during CON (151 ± 11 bpm) when compared with UC and LC (148 ± 16 and 138 ± 13 bpm; p < 0.05). Mean skin temperature was warmer during CON (36.3 ± 0.5°C) when compared with UC (31.2 ± 1.4°C, p < 0.05), which was warmer than during LC (28.5 ± 1.3°C, p < 0.05). No differences were observed for rectal or aural temperatures between trials. At the end of exercise, heat storage was hyperthermic (3.04 ± 0.68 J · g -1), thermoneutral (0.18 ± 1.21 J · g-1), and hypothermic (-2.37 ± 0.81 J · g-4) during CON, UC, and LC, respectively (p < 0.05). Perceived exertion was lowest during LC and greatest during CON (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that cooling the lower body during arm exercise in hot conditions is more effective in reducing physiological and thermal strain than cooling the upper body.

    KW - Aural temperature

    KW - Cooling

    KW - Heat storage

    KW - Ice packs

    KW - Rectal temperature

    KW - Skin temperature

    KW - Upper-body exercise

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=1542410278&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    M3 - Article

    VL - 75

    SP - 220

    EP - 226

    JO - Aerospace medicine and human performance

    JF - Aerospace medicine and human performance

    SN - 2375-6314

    IS - 3

    ER -