Repeated sprint cycling performance is not enhanced by ischaemic preconditioning or muscle heating strategies
Scott Cocking, Mohammed Ihsan, Helen Jones, Clint Hansen, N. Timothy Cable, Dick H. J. Thijssen, Mathew G Wilson
Abstract
ABSTRACT Introduction: Both ischaemic preconditioning (IPC) and muscle heat maintenance can be effective in enhancing repeated‐sprint performance (RSA) when applied individually, acting mechanisms of these interventions, however, likely differ. It is unclear if, when combined, these interventions could further improve RSA. Methods: Eleven trained cyclists undertook experimental test sessions, whereby IPC (4 × 5‐min at 220 mmHg) and SHAM (4 × 5‐min at 20 mmHg) were each performed on two separate visits, each combined with either passive muscle heating or thermoneutral insulation prior to an “all‐out” repeated‐sprint task (10 × 6‐s sprints with 24‐s recovery). Primary outcome measures were peak and average power output (W), whist secondary measures were muscular activation and muscular oxygenation, measured via Electromyography (EMG) and Near‐infrared spectroscopy (NIRS), respectively. Results: IPC did not enhance peak [6 (−14–26)W; P = 0.62] or average [12 (−7–31)W; P = 0.28] power output versus SHAM. Additionally, no performance benefits were observed when increasing muscle temperature in combination with IPC [5 (−14–19) watts; P = 0.67], or in isolation to IPC [9 (−9–28)W; P = 0.4] versus SHAM. No changes in EMG or microvascular changes were present ( P > 0.05, respectively) between conditions. Conclusion: Overall, neither IPC, muscle heating, or a combination of both enhances RSA cycling performance in trained individuals.