Influence of fluid intake pattern on short-term recovery from prolonged, submaximal running and subsequent exercise capacity

Stephen H. Wong, Clyde Williams, Mark Simpson, Tetsuro Ogaki

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

26 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The aim of this study was to examine if the pattern of fluid intake with a carbohydrate-electrolyte solution during 4 h recovery from prolonged, submaximal running would influence the subsequent endurance capacity. Seven well-trained athletes aged 19.8 ± 0.3 years (mean ± s(x̄) took part in the study, which had university ethical committee approval. They ran at 70% V̇O2 max on a level treadmill for 90 min (T1), or until volitional fatigue, whichever came first, on two occasions, at least 7-10 days apart. Four hours later, the subjects ran at the same speed for as long as possible (T2), as a measure of their endurance capacity. During the 4 h rehydration recovery period, the runners were allowed to drink a carbohydrate-electrolyte solution (6.9% Lucozade-Sport; sodium, 24 mmol l-1; potassium, 2.6 mmol l-1; calcium, 1.2 mmol l-1; osmolality, 300 mOsm kg-1) ad libitum on one occasion. On the other occasion, the volume of the same fluid was prescribed from calculations of the body mass loss during T1 (2.6% of pre-exercise body mass). All subjects completed the 90 min run during T1 on both trials. However, during T2, in the prescribed intake trial, the exercise time to exhaustion was 16% longer (P < 0.05) than during T2 in the ad libitum trial (69.9 ± 9.1 vs 60.2 ± 10.2 min). Although there was no difference between conditions in the total volume ingested (1499 ± 155 vs 1405 ± 215 ml), the volume of carbohydrate-electrolyte solution ingested in the fourth hour of the rehydration recovery period was greater in the prescribed intake trial than in the ad libitum trial (258 ± 52 vs 78 ± 34 ml; P < 0.05). The amount of glucose ingested in this period during the prescribed intake trial was also greater than during the ad libitum trial (17.8 ± 3.6 vs 5.4 ± 2.4 g; P < 0.05). There was a higher blood lactate concentration at the start of T2 in the prescribed intake trial than in the ad libitum trial (1.12 ± 0.20 vs 0.94 ± 0.09 mmol l-1; P < 0.05), but there were no differences in blood glucose, plasma insulin, free fatty acid concentrations or urine volume between trials. The results of this study suggest that drinking a prescribed volume of a carbohydrate-electrolyte solution after prolonged exercise, calculated to replace the body fluid losses, restores endurance capacity to a greater extent than ad libitum rehydration during 4 h of recovery, even though the total volumes ingested were the same between trials.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)143-152
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Sports Sciences
Volume16
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Feb 1998

Fingerprint

Running
Electrolytes
Fluid Therapy
Carbohydrates
Exercise
Body Fluids
Nonesterified Fatty Acids
Athletes
Osmolar Concentration
Drinking
Sports
Fatigue
Blood Glucose
Lactic Acid
Potassium
Sodium
Urine
Insulin
Calcium
Glucose

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
  • Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation

Cite this

Influence of fluid intake pattern on short-term recovery from prolonged, submaximal running and subsequent exercise capacity. / Wong, Stephen H.; Williams, Clyde; Simpson, Mark; Ogaki, Tetsuro.

In: Journal of Sports Sciences, Vol. 16, No. 2, 02.1998, p. 143-152.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Wong, Stephen H. ; Williams, Clyde ; Simpson, Mark ; Ogaki, Tetsuro. / Influence of fluid intake pattern on short-term recovery from prolonged, submaximal running and subsequent exercise capacity. In: Journal of Sports Sciences. 1998 ; Vol. 16, No. 2. pp. 143-152.
@article{84f05ab70d4948a1bc913abbd3219789,
title = "Influence of fluid intake pattern on short-term recovery from prolonged, submaximal running and subsequent exercise capacity",
abstract = "The aim of this study was to examine if the pattern of fluid intake with a carbohydrate-electrolyte solution during 4 h recovery from prolonged, submaximal running would influence the subsequent endurance capacity. Seven well-trained athletes aged 19.8 ± 0.3 years (mean ± s(x̄) took part in the study, which had university ethical committee approval. They ran at 70{\%} V̇O2 max on a level treadmill for 90 min (T1), or until volitional fatigue, whichever came first, on two occasions, at least 7-10 days apart. Four hours later, the subjects ran at the same speed for as long as possible (T2), as a measure of their endurance capacity. During the 4 h rehydration recovery period, the runners were allowed to drink a carbohydrate-electrolyte solution (6.9{\%} Lucozade-Sport; sodium, 24 mmol l-1; potassium, 2.6 mmol l-1; calcium, 1.2 mmol l-1; osmolality, 300 mOsm kg-1) ad libitum on one occasion. On the other occasion, the volume of the same fluid was prescribed from calculations of the body mass loss during T1 (2.6{\%} of pre-exercise body mass). All subjects completed the 90 min run during T1 on both trials. However, during T2, in the prescribed intake trial, the exercise time to exhaustion was 16{\%} longer (P < 0.05) than during T2 in the ad libitum trial (69.9 ± 9.1 vs 60.2 ± 10.2 min). Although there was no difference between conditions in the total volume ingested (1499 ± 155 vs 1405 ± 215 ml), the volume of carbohydrate-electrolyte solution ingested in the fourth hour of the rehydration recovery period was greater in the prescribed intake trial than in the ad libitum trial (258 ± 52 vs 78 ± 34 ml; P < 0.05). The amount of glucose ingested in this period during the prescribed intake trial was also greater than during the ad libitum trial (17.8 ± 3.6 vs 5.4 ± 2.4 g; P < 0.05). There was a higher blood lactate concentration at the start of T2 in the prescribed intake trial than in the ad libitum trial (1.12 ± 0.20 vs 0.94 ± 0.09 mmol l-1; P < 0.05), but there were no differences in blood glucose, plasma insulin, free fatty acid concentrations or urine volume between trials. The results of this study suggest that drinking a prescribed volume of a carbohydrate-electrolyte solution after prolonged exercise, calculated to replace the body fluid losses, restores endurance capacity to a greater extent than ad libitum rehydration during 4 h of recovery, even though the total volumes ingested were the same between trials.",
author = "Wong, {Stephen H.} and Clyde Williams and Mark Simpson and Tetsuro Ogaki",
year = "1998",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1080/026404198366858",
language = "English",
volume = "16",
pages = "143--152",
journal = "Journal of Sports Sciences",
issn = "0264-0414",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Influence of fluid intake pattern on short-term recovery from prolonged, submaximal running and subsequent exercise capacity

AU - Wong, Stephen H.

AU - Williams, Clyde

AU - Simpson, Mark

AU - Ogaki, Tetsuro

PY - 1998/2

Y1 - 1998/2

N2 - The aim of this study was to examine if the pattern of fluid intake with a carbohydrate-electrolyte solution during 4 h recovery from prolonged, submaximal running would influence the subsequent endurance capacity. Seven well-trained athletes aged 19.8 ± 0.3 years (mean ± s(x̄) took part in the study, which had university ethical committee approval. They ran at 70% V̇O2 max on a level treadmill for 90 min (T1), or until volitional fatigue, whichever came first, on two occasions, at least 7-10 days apart. Four hours later, the subjects ran at the same speed for as long as possible (T2), as a measure of their endurance capacity. During the 4 h rehydration recovery period, the runners were allowed to drink a carbohydrate-electrolyte solution (6.9% Lucozade-Sport; sodium, 24 mmol l-1; potassium, 2.6 mmol l-1; calcium, 1.2 mmol l-1; osmolality, 300 mOsm kg-1) ad libitum on one occasion. On the other occasion, the volume of the same fluid was prescribed from calculations of the body mass loss during T1 (2.6% of pre-exercise body mass). All subjects completed the 90 min run during T1 on both trials. However, during T2, in the prescribed intake trial, the exercise time to exhaustion was 16% longer (P < 0.05) than during T2 in the ad libitum trial (69.9 ± 9.1 vs 60.2 ± 10.2 min). Although there was no difference between conditions in the total volume ingested (1499 ± 155 vs 1405 ± 215 ml), the volume of carbohydrate-electrolyte solution ingested in the fourth hour of the rehydration recovery period was greater in the prescribed intake trial than in the ad libitum trial (258 ± 52 vs 78 ± 34 ml; P < 0.05). The amount of glucose ingested in this period during the prescribed intake trial was also greater than during the ad libitum trial (17.8 ± 3.6 vs 5.4 ± 2.4 g; P < 0.05). There was a higher blood lactate concentration at the start of T2 in the prescribed intake trial than in the ad libitum trial (1.12 ± 0.20 vs 0.94 ± 0.09 mmol l-1; P < 0.05), but there were no differences in blood glucose, plasma insulin, free fatty acid concentrations or urine volume between trials. The results of this study suggest that drinking a prescribed volume of a carbohydrate-electrolyte solution after prolonged exercise, calculated to replace the body fluid losses, restores endurance capacity to a greater extent than ad libitum rehydration during 4 h of recovery, even though the total volumes ingested were the same between trials.

AB - The aim of this study was to examine if the pattern of fluid intake with a carbohydrate-electrolyte solution during 4 h recovery from prolonged, submaximal running would influence the subsequent endurance capacity. Seven well-trained athletes aged 19.8 ± 0.3 years (mean ± s(x̄) took part in the study, which had university ethical committee approval. They ran at 70% V̇O2 max on a level treadmill for 90 min (T1), or until volitional fatigue, whichever came first, on two occasions, at least 7-10 days apart. Four hours later, the subjects ran at the same speed for as long as possible (T2), as a measure of their endurance capacity. During the 4 h rehydration recovery period, the runners were allowed to drink a carbohydrate-electrolyte solution (6.9% Lucozade-Sport; sodium, 24 mmol l-1; potassium, 2.6 mmol l-1; calcium, 1.2 mmol l-1; osmolality, 300 mOsm kg-1) ad libitum on one occasion. On the other occasion, the volume of the same fluid was prescribed from calculations of the body mass loss during T1 (2.6% of pre-exercise body mass). All subjects completed the 90 min run during T1 on both trials. However, during T2, in the prescribed intake trial, the exercise time to exhaustion was 16% longer (P < 0.05) than during T2 in the ad libitum trial (69.9 ± 9.1 vs 60.2 ± 10.2 min). Although there was no difference between conditions in the total volume ingested (1499 ± 155 vs 1405 ± 215 ml), the volume of carbohydrate-electrolyte solution ingested in the fourth hour of the rehydration recovery period was greater in the prescribed intake trial than in the ad libitum trial (258 ± 52 vs 78 ± 34 ml; P < 0.05). The amount of glucose ingested in this period during the prescribed intake trial was also greater than during the ad libitum trial (17.8 ± 3.6 vs 5.4 ± 2.4 g; P < 0.05). There was a higher blood lactate concentration at the start of T2 in the prescribed intake trial than in the ad libitum trial (1.12 ± 0.20 vs 0.94 ± 0.09 mmol l-1; P < 0.05), but there were no differences in blood glucose, plasma insulin, free fatty acid concentrations or urine volume between trials. The results of this study suggest that drinking a prescribed volume of a carbohydrate-electrolyte solution after prolonged exercise, calculated to replace the body fluid losses, restores endurance capacity to a greater extent than ad libitum rehydration during 4 h of recovery, even though the total volumes ingested were the same between trials.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0031883326&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0031883326&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/026404198366858

DO - 10.1080/026404198366858

M3 - Article

C2 - 9531003

AN - SCOPUS:0031883326

VL - 16

SP - 143

EP - 152

JO - Journal of Sports Sciences

JF - Journal of Sports Sciences

SN - 0264-0414

IS - 2

ER -