Jem L Cheng, Christina A Pizzola, Keira C Mattook, Kenneth S Noguchi, Calvin M Armstrong, Gurleen K Bagri, Maureen J Macdonald
{"title":"Effects of Lower Limb Heat Therapy, Exercise Training, or a Combined Intervention on Vascular Function: A Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Jem L Cheng, Christina A Pizzola, Keira C Mattook, Kenneth S Noguchi, Calvin M Armstrong, Gurleen K Bagri, Maureen J Macdonald","doi":"10.1249/MSS.0000000000003550","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study is to compare the effects of 8 wk of no intervention (CON), lower limb heat therapy (HEAT), moderate-intensity exercise training (EX), or combined training and therapy (HEATEX) in young, healthy recreationally active adults.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Sixty participants (23 ± 3 yr, 30 females) were randomly allocated into CON ( n = 15), HEAT ( n = 15), EX ( n = 14), or HEATEX ( n = 16). The primary outcome was vascular function, assessed through brachial artery flow-mediated dilation tests. Secondary measures included arterial stiffness (pulse wave velocity), cardiorespiratory fitness (V̇O 2peak ), body composition, and quadriceps muscle strength.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no differences in brachial artery flow-mediated dilation between the groups before and after the interventions (all P > 0.05). Both interventions with a heating component were associated with within-group reductions in carotid-femoral pulse wave, and increase in absolute and relative V̇O 2peak after 8 wk (HEAT: ∆-0.27 [-0.53, -0.02] m s -1 , ∆0.18 [0.06, 0.29] L·min -1 , ∆2.18 [0.60, 3.76] mL·kg -1 ·min -1 , respectively; HEATEX: ∆-0.33 [-0.58, -0.09], ∆0.21 [0.11, 0.32] L·min -1 , ∆2.59 [1.06, 4.12] mL·kg -1 ·min -1 , respectively), but no between-group differences were observed ( P = 0.25, P = 0.21, and P = 0.55, respectively). There was also a within-group decrease in body fat percentage with EX (∆-1.37 [-2.45, -0.29] %), but no changes in leg strength in any of the groups ( P = 0.79).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This randomized controlled trial is the first to examine the efficacy of lower limb heating against traditionally prescribed exercise training. In our young cohort, 8 wk of training and/or therapy was insufficient to improve vascular function. More intense protocols and longer interventions involving lower limb heating may be required to elicit improvements in health outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":18426,"journal":{"name":"Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise","volume":" ","pages":"94-105"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000003550","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare the effects of 8 wk of no intervention (CON), lower limb heat therapy (HEAT), moderate-intensity exercise training (EX), or combined training and therapy (HEATEX) in young, healthy recreationally active adults.
Methods: Sixty participants (23 ± 3 yr, 30 females) were randomly allocated into CON ( n = 15), HEAT ( n = 15), EX ( n = 14), or HEATEX ( n = 16). The primary outcome was vascular function, assessed through brachial artery flow-mediated dilation tests. Secondary measures included arterial stiffness (pulse wave velocity), cardiorespiratory fitness (V̇O 2peak ), body composition, and quadriceps muscle strength.
Results: There were no differences in brachial artery flow-mediated dilation between the groups before and after the interventions (all P > 0.05). Both interventions with a heating component were associated with within-group reductions in carotid-femoral pulse wave, and increase in absolute and relative V̇O 2peak after 8 wk (HEAT: ∆-0.27 [-0.53, -0.02] m s -1 , ∆0.18 [0.06, 0.29] L·min -1 , ∆2.18 [0.60, 3.76] mL·kg -1 ·min -1 , respectively; HEATEX: ∆-0.33 [-0.58, -0.09], ∆0.21 [0.11, 0.32] L·min -1 , ∆2.59 [1.06, 4.12] mL·kg -1 ·min -1 , respectively), but no between-group differences were observed ( P = 0.25, P = 0.21, and P = 0.55, respectively). There was also a within-group decrease in body fat percentage with EX (∆-1.37 [-2.45, -0.29] %), but no changes in leg strength in any of the groups ( P = 0.79).
Conclusions: This randomized controlled trial is the first to examine the efficacy of lower limb heating against traditionally prescribed exercise training. In our young cohort, 8 wk of training and/or therapy was insufficient to improve vascular function. More intense protocols and longer interventions involving lower limb heating may be required to elicit improvements in health outcomes.
期刊介绍:
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise® features original investigations, clinical studies, and comprehensive reviews on current topics in sports medicine and exercise science. With this leading multidisciplinary journal, exercise physiologists, physiatrists, physical therapists, team physicians, and athletic trainers get a vital exchange of information from basic and applied science, medicine, education, and allied health fields.