Rappelt Ludwig, Held Steffen, Wiedenmann Tim, Deutsch Jan-Philip, Hochstrate Jonas, Wicker Pamela, Donath Lars
Department of Intervention Research in Exercise Training, German Sport University Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Department of Movement and Training Science, University of Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany.
Front Physiol. 2023 Apr 20;14:1134778. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2023.1134778. eCollection 2023.
Low-intensity endurance training is frequently performed at gradually higher training intensities than intended, resulting in a shift towards threshold training. By restricting oral breathing and only allowing for nasal breathing this shift might be reduced. Nineteen physically healthy adults (3 females, age: 26.5 ± 5.1 years; height: 1.77 ± 0.08 m; body mass: 77.3 ± 11.4 kg; VOpeak: 53.4 ± 6.6 mL·kg min) performed 60 min of self-selected, similar (144.7 ± 56.3 vs. 147.0 ± 54.2 W, = 0.60) low-intensity cycling with breathing restriction (nasal-only breathing) and without restrictions (oro-nasal breathing). During these sessions heart rate, respiratory gas exchange data and power output data were recorded continuously. Total ventilation ( < 0.001, η = 0.45), carbon dioxide release ( = 0.02, η = 0.28), oxygen uptake ( = 0.03, η = 0.23), and breathing frequency ( = 0.01, η = 0.35) were lower during nasal-only breathing. Furthermore, lower capillary blood lactate concentrations were found towards the end of the training session during nasal-only breathing (time x condition-interaction effect: = 0.02, η = 0.17). Even though discomfort was rated marginally higher during nasal-only breathing ( = 0.03, η = 0.24), ratings of perceived effort did not differ between the two conditions ( ≥ 0.06, η = 0.01). No significant "condition" differences were found for intensity distribution (time spent in training zone quantified by power output and heart rate) ( ≥ 0.24, η ≤ 0.07). Nasal-only breathing seems to be associated with possible physiological changes that may help to maintain physical health in endurance athletes during low intensity endurance training. However, it did not prevent participants from performing low-intensity training at higher intensities than intended. Longitudinal studies are warranted to evaluate longitudinal responses of changes in breathing patterns.
低强度耐力训练通常在比预期逐渐更高的训练强度下进行，导致训练向阈值训练转变。通过限制口呼吸，只允许鼻呼吸，这种转变可能会减少。19名身体健康的成年人（3名女性，年龄：26.5±5.1岁；身高：1.77±0.08米；体重：77.3±11.4千克；峰值摄氧量：53.4±6.6毫升·千克·分钟）进行了60分钟的自选、相似强度（144.7±56.3瓦对147.0±54.2瓦，P = 0.60）的低强度骑行，一组为呼吸受限（仅鼻呼吸），另一组不受限（口鼻呼吸）。在这些训练过程中，持续记录心率、呼吸气体交换数据和功率输出数据。仅鼻呼吸时，总通气量（P<0.001，η² = 0.45）、二氧化碳释放量（P = 0.02，η² = 0.28）、摄氧量（P = 0.03，η² = 0.23）和呼吸频率（P = 0.01，η² = 0.35）较低。此外，在仅鼻呼吸的训练时段结束时，发现毛细血管血乳酸浓度较低（时间×条件交互效应：P = 0.02，η² = 0.17）。尽管仅鼻呼吸时不适评分略高（P = 0.03，η² = 0.24），但两种条件下的主观用力程度评分没有差异（P≥0.06，η² = 0.01）。在强度分布方面（通过功率输出和心率量化的在训练区域花费的时间）未发现显著的“条件”差异（P≥0.24，η²≤0.07）。仅鼻呼吸似乎与可能的生理变化有关，这些生理变化可能有助于耐力运动员在低强度耐力训练期间保持身体健康。然而，它并没有阻止参与者以高于预期的强度进行低强度训练。有必要进行纵向研究来评估呼吸模式变化的纵向反应。
