Departmenet of Anasthesiology and Intensive Therapy, University Medical Center, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Centre for Cardiovascular and Metabolic Neuroscience, Department of Neuroscience, Physiology & Pharmacology, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023 Feb 6;20(4):2838. doi: 10.3390/ijerph20042838.
Recently, increased attention to breathing techniques during exercise has addressed the need for more in-depth study of the ergogenic effects of breathing manipulation. The physiological effects of phonation, as a potential breathing tool, have not yet been studied. Thus, the aim of this study was to investigate the respiratory, metabolic and hemodynamic responses of phonated exhalation and its impact on locomotor-respiratory entrainment in young healthy adults during moderate exercise. Twenty-six young, healthy participants were subjected to peak expiratory flow (PEF) measurements and a moderate steady cycling protocol based on three different breathing patterns (BrP): spontaneous breathing (BrP1), phonated breathing pronouncing "h" (BrP2) and phonated breathing pronouncing "ss" (BrP3). The heart rate, arterial blood pressure, oxygen consumption, CO production, respiratory rate (RR), tidal volume (VT), respiratory exchange ratio and ventilatory equivalents for both important respiratory gasses (eqO and eqCO) were measured (Cosmed, Italy) simultaneously during a short period of moderate stationary cycling at a predefined cadence. To evaluate the psychological outcomes, the rate of perceived exertion (RPE) was recorded after each cycling protocol. The locomotor-respiratory frequency coupling was calculated at each BrP, and dominant coupling was determined. Phonation gradually decreased the PEF (388 ± 54 L/min at BrP2 and 234 ± 54 L/min at BrP3 compared to 455 ± 42 L/min upon spontaneous breathing) and affected the RR (18.8 ± 5.0 min at BrP2 compared to 22.6 ± 5.5 min at BrP1 and 21.3 ± 7.2 min at BrP3), VT (2.33 ± 0.53 L at BrP2 compared to 1.86 ± 0.46 L at BrP1 and 2.00 ± 0.45 L at BrP3), dominant locomotor-respiratory coupling (1:4 at BrP2 compared to 1:3 at BrP1 and BrP2) and RPE (10.27 ± 2.00 at BrP1 compared to 11.95 ± 1.79 at BrP1 and 11.95 ± 1.01 at BrP3) but not any other respiratory, metabolic or hemodynamic measures of the healthy adults during moderate cycling. The ventilatory efficiency was shown to improve upon dominant locomotor-respiratory coupling, regardless of BrP (eqO = 21.8 ± 2.2 and eqCO = 24.0 ± 1.9), compared to the other entrainment coupling regimes (25.3 ± 1.9, 27.3 ± 1.7) and no entrainment (24.8 ± 1.5, 26.5 ± 1.3), respectively. No interaction between phonated breathing and entrainment was observed during moderate cycling. We showed, for the first time, that phonation can be used as a simple tool to manipulate expiratory flow. Furthermore, our results indicated that in young healthy adults, entrainment, rather than expiratory resistance, preferentially affected ergogenic enhancement upon moderate stationary cycling. It can only be speculated that phonation would be a good strategy to increase exercise tolerance among COPD patients or to boost the respiratory efficiency of healthy people at higher exercise loads.
最近,人们越来越关注运动中的呼吸技巧,这使得人们需要更深入地研究呼吸操纵的生能效应。发声作为一种潜在的呼吸工具的生理效应尚未得到研究。因此,本研究旨在探讨在年轻健康成年人进行中等强度运动时,发声呼气对呼吸、代谢和血液动力学的影响及其对运动-呼吸同步的影响。26 名年轻健康的参与者接受了最大呼气流量(PEF)测量和基于三种不同呼吸模式(BrP)的中等稳定循环方案:自主呼吸(BrP1)、发声呼气发“h”音(BrP2)和发声呼气发“ss”音(BrP3)。在预设的节奏下,使用 Cosmed(意大利)同时测量心率、动脉血压、耗氧量、CO2 产量、呼吸频率(RR)、潮气量(VT)、呼吸交换率和两种重要呼吸气体的通气当量(eqO 和 eqCO)。为了评估心理结果,在每个循环方案后记录了感知用力程度(RPE)。在每个 BrP 计算运动-呼吸频率耦合,并确定主导耦合。发声逐渐降低 PEF(BrP2 时为 388 ± 54 L/min,BrP3 时为 234 ± 54 L/min,与自主呼吸时的 455 ± 42 L/min 相比),并影响 RR(BrP2 时为 18.8 ± 5.0 min,与 BrP1 时的 22.6 ± 5.5 min 和 BrP3 时的 21.3 ± 7.2 min 相比)、VT(BrP2 时为 2.33 ± 0.53 L,与 BrP1 时的 1.86 ± 0.46 L 和 BrP3 时的 2.00 ± 0.45 L 相比)、主导运动-呼吸耦合(BrP2 时为 1:4,与 BrP1 时的 1:3 和 BrP3 时的 1:3 相比)和 RPE(BrP1 时为 10.27 ± 2.00,与 BrP1 时的 11.95 ± 1.79 和 BrP3 时的 11.95 ± 1.01 相比),但对健康成年人在中等强度骑行时的其他呼吸、代谢或血液动力学测量没有影响。与其他同步耦合状态(25.3 ± 1.9、27.3 ± 1.7)和无同步耦合(24.8 ± 1.5、26.5 ± 1.3)相比,无论 BrP 如何,主导运动-呼吸耦合均显示出通气效率提高(eqO = 21.8 ± 2.2 和 eqCO = 24.0 ± 1.9)。在中等强度骑行过程中,没有观察到发声呼吸和同步之间的相互作用。我们首次表明,发声可以作为一种简单的工具来操纵呼气流量。此外,我们的结果表明,在年轻健康的成年人中,同步,而不是呼气阻力,优先影响中等稳定循环时的生能增强。只能推测发声可能是一种增加 COPD 患者运动耐量或在更高运动负荷下提高健康人呼吸效率的好策略。