Upper-Body versus Lower-Body Cooling in Individuals with Paraplegia during Arm-Crank Exercise in the Heat

Journal Article (2023)
Author(s)

Puck Alkemade (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam)

Thijs M.H. Eijsvogels (Radboud University Medical Center)

Thomas W.J. Janssen (Amsterdam Institute of Sport Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam)

K.M.B. Jansen (TU Delft - Materializing Futures)

Boris R.M. Kingma (TNO)

Hein A.M. Daanen (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Institute of Sport Science)

Research Group
Materializing Futures
Copyright
© 2023 Puck Alkemade, Thijs M.H. Eijsvogels, Thomas W.J. Janssen, K.M.B. Jansen, Boris R.M. Kingma, Hein A.M. Daanen
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000003244
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2023
Language
English
Copyright
© 2023 Puck Alkemade, Thijs M.H. Eijsvogels, Thomas W.J. Janssen, K.M.B. Jansen, Boris R.M. Kingma, Hein A.M. Daanen
Research Group
Materializing Futures
Issue number
11
Volume number
55
Pages (from-to)
2014-2024
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

PURPOSE: For wheelchair users with a spinal cord injury, the lower body may be a more convenient cooling site than the upper body. However, it remains unknown if leg cooling reduces thermal strain in these individuals. We compared the impact of upper-body versus lower-body cooling on physiological and perceptual outcomes during submaximal arm-crank exercise under heat stress in individuals with paraplegia. METHODS: Twelve male participants with paraplegia (T4-L2, 50% complete lesion) performed a maximal exercise test in temperate conditions, and three heat stress tests (32°C, 40% relative humidity) in which they received upper-body cooling (COOL-UB), lower-body cooling (COOL-LB), or no cooling (CON) in a randomized counterbalanced order. Each heat stress test consisted of four exercise blocks of 15 min at 50% of peak power output, with 3 min of rest in between. Cooling was applied using water-perfused pads, with 14.8-m tubing in both COOL-UB and COOL-LB. RESULTS: Gastrointestinal temperature was 0.2°C (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.1°C to 0.3°C) lower during exercise in COOL-UB versus CON (37.5°C ± 0.4°C vs 37.7°C ± 0.3°C, P = 0.009), with no difference between COOL-LB and CON ( P = 1.0). Heart rate was lower in both COOL-UB (-7 bpm; 95% CI, -11 to -3 bpm; P = 0.01) and COOL-LB (-5 bpm; 95% CI, -9 to -1 bpm; P = 0.049) compared with CON. The skin temperature reduction at the cooled skin sites was larger in COOL-LB (-10.8°C ± 1.1°C) than in COOL-UB (-6.7°C ± 1.4°C, P < 0.001), which limited the cooling capacity in COOL-LB. Thermal sensation of the cooled skin sites was improved and overall thermal discomfort was lower in COOL-UB ( P = 0.01 and P = 0.04) but not in COOL-LB ( P = 0.17 and P = 0.59) compared with CON. CONCLUSIONS: Upper-body cooling more effectively reduced thermal strain than lower-body cooling in individuals with paraplegia, as it induced greater thermophysiological and perceptual benefits.