Running performance, pace strategy, and thermoregulation differ between a treadmill and indoor track

Matthew W.S. Heesch, Dustin R. Slivka

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    4 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Self-paced time trials have long been used as an indicator of running performance. The purpose of this study was to examine if potential physiological and thermoregulatory differences between treadmill and track running would alter performance in a self-paced 10-km time trial. Ten (n = 10) recreationally trained male distance runners (age: 32 ± 6 years, height: 177 ± 6 cm, body mass: 76 ± 11 kg, % body fat: 14.4 ± 4.5, VO2peak: 62.2 ± 9.5 ml·kg-1·min-1) completed two 10-km time trials in a randomized, counterbalanced order on separate days: 1 on a treadmill at 1% grade (TM), and 1 on a 200-m indoor track (IT). Core temperature, skin temperature, and heart rate (HR) were continuously monitored during the run. The ten-kilometer run time was longer during the IT trial (41.66 ± 5.86 minutes) than during the TM trial (40.10 6 6.06 minutes; p < 0.001), despite a faster first kilometer in the IT trial (p = 0.029). There were no differences between TM and IT trials in the HR (174 ± 13 b·min-1 and 178 ± 13 b·min-1, respectively; p = 0.846) or body core temperature (38.6 ± 0.5°C and 38.9 ± 0.5°C, respectively, p = 0.218). Skin temperature was higher in the TM trial (35.1 ± 2.5°C) than in the IT trial (32.7 ± 3.0°C; p = 0.002). These data indicate that performance differences exist between a 10-km time trial performed on a TM vs. an IT, potentially because of differences in pacing strategy or metabolic cost between the 2 conditions.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)330-335
    Number of pages6
    JournalJournal of strength and conditioning research
    Volume29
    Issue number2
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Feb 1 2015

    Fingerprint

    Body Temperature Regulation
    Skin Temperature
    Heart Rate
    Body Temperature
    Adipose Tissue
    Costs and Cost Analysis
    Temperature

    Keywords

    • Core temperature
    • Skin temperature
    • Time trial

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

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

    Cite this

    Running performance, pace strategy, and thermoregulation differ between a treadmill and indoor track. / Heesch, Matthew W.S.; Slivka, Dustin R.

    In: Journal of strength and conditioning research, Vol. 29, No. 2, 01.02.2015, p. 330-335.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    @article{f3f327cbc9fa40b18d2802d1644d2ca4,
    title = "Running performance, pace strategy, and thermoregulation differ between a treadmill and indoor track",
    abstract = "Self-paced time trials have long been used as an indicator of running performance. The purpose of this study was to examine if potential physiological and thermoregulatory differences between treadmill and track running would alter performance in a self-paced 10-km time trial. Ten (n = 10) recreationally trained male distance runners (age: 32 ± 6 years, height: 177 ± 6 cm, body mass: 76 ± 11 kg, {\%} body fat: 14.4 ± 4.5, VO2peak: 62.2 ± 9.5 ml·kg-1·min-1) completed two 10-km time trials in a randomized, counterbalanced order on separate days: 1 on a treadmill at 1{\%} grade (TM), and 1 on a 200-m indoor track (IT). Core temperature, skin temperature, and heart rate (HR) were continuously monitored during the run. The ten-kilometer run time was longer during the IT trial (41.66 ± 5.86 minutes) than during the TM trial (40.10 6 6.06 minutes; p < 0.001), despite a faster first kilometer in the IT trial (p = 0.029). There were no differences between TM and IT trials in the HR (174 ± 13 b·min-1 and 178 ± 13 b·min-1, respectively; p = 0.846) or body core temperature (38.6 ± 0.5°C and 38.9 ± 0.5°C, respectively, p = 0.218). Skin temperature was higher in the TM trial (35.1 ± 2.5°C) than in the IT trial (32.7 ± 3.0°C; p = 0.002). These data indicate that performance differences exist between a 10-km time trial performed on a TM vs. an IT, potentially because of differences in pacing strategy or metabolic cost between the 2 conditions.",
    keywords = "Core temperature, Skin temperature, Time trial",
    author = "Heesch, {Matthew W.S.} and Slivka, {Dustin R.}",
    year = "2015",
    month = "2",
    day = "1",
    doi = "10.1519/JSC.0000000000000662",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "29",
    pages = "330--335",
    journal = "Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research",
    issn = "1064-8011",
    publisher = "NSCA National Strength and Conditioning Association",
    number = "2",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Running performance, pace strategy, and thermoregulation differ between a treadmill and indoor track

    AU - Heesch, Matthew W.S.

    AU - Slivka, Dustin R.

    PY - 2015/2/1

    Y1 - 2015/2/1

    N2 - Self-paced time trials have long been used as an indicator of running performance. The purpose of this study was to examine if potential physiological and thermoregulatory differences between treadmill and track running would alter performance in a self-paced 10-km time trial. Ten (n = 10) recreationally trained male distance runners (age: 32 ± 6 years, height: 177 ± 6 cm, body mass: 76 ± 11 kg, % body fat: 14.4 ± 4.5, VO2peak: 62.2 ± 9.5 ml·kg-1·min-1) completed two 10-km time trials in a randomized, counterbalanced order on separate days: 1 on a treadmill at 1% grade (TM), and 1 on a 200-m indoor track (IT). Core temperature, skin temperature, and heart rate (HR) were continuously monitored during the run. The ten-kilometer run time was longer during the IT trial (41.66 ± 5.86 minutes) than during the TM trial (40.10 6 6.06 minutes; p < 0.001), despite a faster first kilometer in the IT trial (p = 0.029). There were no differences between TM and IT trials in the HR (174 ± 13 b·min-1 and 178 ± 13 b·min-1, respectively; p = 0.846) or body core temperature (38.6 ± 0.5°C and 38.9 ± 0.5°C, respectively, p = 0.218). Skin temperature was higher in the TM trial (35.1 ± 2.5°C) than in the IT trial (32.7 ± 3.0°C; p = 0.002). These data indicate that performance differences exist between a 10-km time trial performed on a TM vs. an IT, potentially because of differences in pacing strategy or metabolic cost between the 2 conditions.

    AB - Self-paced time trials have long been used as an indicator of running performance. The purpose of this study was to examine if potential physiological and thermoregulatory differences between treadmill and track running would alter performance in a self-paced 10-km time trial. Ten (n = 10) recreationally trained male distance runners (age: 32 ± 6 years, height: 177 ± 6 cm, body mass: 76 ± 11 kg, % body fat: 14.4 ± 4.5, VO2peak: 62.2 ± 9.5 ml·kg-1·min-1) completed two 10-km time trials in a randomized, counterbalanced order on separate days: 1 on a treadmill at 1% grade (TM), and 1 on a 200-m indoor track (IT). Core temperature, skin temperature, and heart rate (HR) were continuously monitored during the run. The ten-kilometer run time was longer during the IT trial (41.66 ± 5.86 minutes) than during the TM trial (40.10 6 6.06 minutes; p < 0.001), despite a faster first kilometer in the IT trial (p = 0.029). There were no differences between TM and IT trials in the HR (174 ± 13 b·min-1 and 178 ± 13 b·min-1, respectively; p = 0.846) or body core temperature (38.6 ± 0.5°C and 38.9 ± 0.5°C, respectively, p = 0.218). Skin temperature was higher in the TM trial (35.1 ± 2.5°C) than in the IT trial (32.7 ± 3.0°C; p = 0.002). These data indicate that performance differences exist between a 10-km time trial performed on a TM vs. an IT, potentially because of differences in pacing strategy or metabolic cost between the 2 conditions.

    KW - Core temperature

    KW - Skin temperature

    KW - Time trial

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84925968691&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84925968691&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000662

    DO - 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000662

    M3 - Article

    C2 - 25162647

    AN - SCOPUS:84925968691

    VL - 29

    SP - 330

    EP - 335

    JO - Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

    JF - Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

    SN - 1064-8011

    IS - 2

    ER -