Filtering by
- All Subjects: Health Sciences
Initial FB and HS were assessed in NCAA-DI female soccer athletes (n=10) of a single team in temperate, dry conditions (55-68°F, 18-48% humidity) who were monitored during 3 practices of equal estimated energy expenditure (EE): two outdoors in direct SUR (cold/moderate temperatures) and one indoors without SUR (moderate temperatures). Humidity, temperature, and wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT – a measurement partly based on SUR, including ambient temperature/relative humidity) were recorded using Heat Stress Meters placed in the direct sun or in the shade. Each athlete’s semi-nude dry body weight was recorded before and after exercise. Urine samples were taken before, after, and the morning after. Urine specific gravity (USG) was tested to assess HS. Athletes wore combined heart rate and activity monitors to estimate EE and were provided ad libitum water and/or a zero-calorie sports drink. Their total intake included weights of consumed food and drink. Sweat rate was calculated using body weight change and intakes of liquids minus urine losses/hour.
Two-way repeated measures ANOVA analyzed group-level differences. No significance was found in total FB (1.01±0.32 L/hr) or EE/hr (444±97.1 kcal/hr) across all days (p>0.05). In analyzing individual athlete results, 40% had consistent USG >1.025 (p=0.001) suggesting potential dehydration. These 4 athletes selected water as their beverage, of which is known that consuming only water does not stimulate drinking behavior as does electrolyte drinks. The remaining 60% were overall not dehydrated (USG <1.025) but must be aware of incidental dehydration in hotter temperatures.
The conclusion is that in low-moderate temperatures, athletes self-regulate drinking habits and achieve fluid balance during exercise with or without sun radiation. However, athletes with average USG >1.025 are likely to remain dehydrated in moderate temperatures. The findings suggest that more education would benefit these athletes by ensuring hydration in any environment.
This study investigated the effect of environmental heat stress on physiological and performance measures during a ~4 mi time trial (TT) mountain hike in the Phoenix metropolitan area. Participants (n = 12; 7M/5F; age 21.6 ± 2.47 [SD]) climbed ‘A’ mountain (~1 mi) four times on a hot day (HOT; wet bulb globe temperature [WBGT] = 31.6°C) and again on a moderate day (MOD; WBGT = 19.0°C). Physiological and performance measures were made before and throughout the course of each hike. Mean pre-hike hydration status (urine specific gravity [USG]) indicated that participants began both HOT and MOD trials in a euhydrated state (1.016 ± 0.010 and 1.010 ± 0.008, respectively) and means did not differ significantly between trials (p = .085). Time trial performance was impaired by -11% (11.1 minutes) in the HOT trial (105 ± 21.7 min), compared to MOD (93.9 ± 13.1 min) (p = .013). Peak core temperatures were significantly higher in HOT (38.5 ± 0.36°C) versus MOD (38.0 ± 0.30°C) with progressively increasing differences between trials over time (p < .001). Peak ratings of perceived exertion were significantly higher in HOT (14.2 ± 2.38) compared to MOD (11.9 ± 2.02) (p = .007). Relative intensity (percent of age-predicted maximal heart rate [HR]), estimated absolute intensity (metabolic equivalents [METs]), and estimated energy expenditure (MET-h) were all increased in HOT, but not significantly so. The HOT condition reduced predicted maximal aerobic capacity (CRFp) by 6% (p = .026). Sweat rates differed significantly between HOT (1.38 ± 0.53 L/h) and MOD (0.84 ± 0.27 L/h) (p = .01). Percent body mass loss (PBML) did not differ significantly between HOT (1.06 ± 0.95%) and MOD (0.98 ± 0.84%) (p = .869). All repeated measures variables showed significant between-subjects effects (p < .05), indicating individual differences in response to test conditions. Heat stress was shown to negatively affect physiological and performance measures in recreational mountain hikers. However, considerable variation exists between individuals, and the degree of physiological and performance impairment is probably due, in part, to differences in aerobic fitness and acclimatization status rather than pre- or during-performance hydration status.