Effect of Environmental and Feedback Interventions on Pacing Profiles in Cycling

A Meta-Analysis

Michael Davies, Bradley Clark, Marijke Welvaert, Sabrina Skorski, Laura Garvican-Lewis, Philo Saunders, Kevin Thompson

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    12 Citations (Scopus)
    4 Downloads (Pure)

    Abstract

    In search of their optimal performance athletes will alter their pacing strategy according to intrinsic and extrinsic physiological, psychological and environmental factors. However, the effect of some of these variables on pacing and exercise performance remains somewhat unclear. Therefore, the aim of this meta-analysis was to provide an overview as to how manipulation of different extrinsic factors affects pacing strategy and exercise performance. Only self-paced exercise studies that provided control and intervention group(s), reported trial variance for power output, disclosed the type of feedback received or withheld, and where time-trial power output data could be segmented into start, middle and end sections; were included in the meta-analysis. Studies with similar themes were grouped together to determine the mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) between control and intervention trials for: hypoxia, hyperoxia, heat-stress, pre-cooling, and various forms of feedback. A total of 26 studies with cycling as the exercise modality were included in the meta-analysis. Of these, four studies manipulated oxygen availability, eleven manipulated heat-stress, four implemented pre-cooling interventions and seven studies manipulated various forms of feedback. Mean power output (MPO) was significantly reduced in the middle and end sections (p < 0.05), but not the start section of hypoxia and heat-stress trials compared to the control trials. In contrast, there was no significant change in trial or section MPO for hyperoxic or pre-cooling conditions compared to the control condition (p > 0.05). Negative feedback improved overall trial MPO and MPO in the middle section of trials (p < 0.05), while informed feedback improved overall trial MPO (p < 0.05). However, positive, neutral and no feedback had no significant effect on overall trial or section MPO (p > 0.05). The available data suggests exercise regulation in hypoxia and heat-stress is delayed in the start section of trials, before significant reductions in MPO occur in the middle and end of the trial. Additionally, negative feedback involving performance deception may afford an upward shift in MPO in the middle section of the trial improving overall performance. Finally, performance improvements can be retained when participants are informed of the deception.

    Original languageEnglish
    Article number591
    Pages (from-to)1-24
    Number of pages24
    JournalFrontiers in Physiology
    Volume7
    Issue numberDEC
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - Dec 2016

    Fingerprint

    Meta-Analysis
    Exercise
    Hot Temperature
    Deception
    Hyperoxia
    Athletes
    Confidence Intervals
    Psychology
    Oxygen
    Control Groups
    Hypoxia

    Cite this

    Davies, Michael ; Clark, Bradley ; Welvaert, Marijke ; Skorski, Sabrina ; Garvican-Lewis, Laura ; Saunders, Philo ; Thompson, Kevin. / Effect of Environmental and Feedback Interventions on Pacing Profiles in Cycling : A Meta-Analysis. In: Frontiers in Physiology. 2016 ; Vol. 7, No. DEC. pp. 1-24.
    @article{b2f308dad3d5439c898326fea4d3455c,
    title = "Effect of Environmental and Feedback Interventions on Pacing Profiles in Cycling: A Meta-Analysis",
    abstract = "In search of their optimal performance athletes will alter their pacing strategy according to intrinsic and extrinsic physiological, psychological and environmental factors. However, the effect of some of these variables on pacing and exercise performance remains somewhat unclear. Therefore, the aim of this meta-analysis was to provide an overview as to how manipulation of different extrinsic factors affects pacing strategy and exercise performance. Only self-paced exercise studies that provided control and intervention group(s), reported trial variance for power output, disclosed the type of feedback received or withheld, and where time-trial power output data could be segmented into start, middle and end sections; were included in the meta-analysis. Studies with similar themes were grouped together to determine the mean difference (MD) with 95{\%} confidence intervals (CIs) between control and intervention trials for: hypoxia, hyperoxia, heat-stress, pre-cooling, and various forms of feedback. A total of 26 studies with cycling as the exercise modality were included in the meta-analysis. Of these, four studies manipulated oxygen availability, eleven manipulated heat-stress, four implemented pre-cooling interventions and seven studies manipulated various forms of feedback. Mean power output (MPO) was significantly reduced in the middle and end sections (p < 0.05), but not the start section of hypoxia and heat-stress trials compared to the control trials. In contrast, there was no significant change in trial or section MPO for hyperoxic or pre-cooling conditions compared to the control condition (p > 0.05). Negative feedback improved overall trial MPO and MPO in the middle section of trials (p < 0.05), while informed feedback improved overall trial MPO (p < 0.05). However, positive, neutral and no feedback had no significant effect on overall trial or section MPO (p > 0.05). The available data suggests exercise regulation in hypoxia and heat-stress is delayed in the start section of trials, before significant reductions in MPO occur in the middle and end of the trial. Additionally, negative feedback involving performance deception may afford an upward shift in MPO in the middle section of the trial improving overall performance. Finally, performance improvements can be retained when participants are informed of the deception.",
    keywords = "Cycling, Deception, Feedback, Heat-stress, Hyperoxia, Hypoxia, Pacing, Pre-cooling",
    author = "Michael Davies and Bradley Clark and Marijke Welvaert and Sabrina Skorski and Laura Garvican-Lewis and Philo Saunders and Kevin Thompson",
    year = "2016",
    month = "12",
    doi = "10.3389/fphys.2016.00591",
    language = "English",
    volume = "7",
    pages = "1--24",
    journal = "Frontiers in Physiology",
    issn = "1664-042X",
    publisher = "Frontiers Media S.A.",
    number = "DEC",

    }

    Effect of Environmental and Feedback Interventions on Pacing Profiles in Cycling : A Meta-Analysis. / Davies, Michael; Clark, Bradley; Welvaert, Marijke; Skorski, Sabrina; Garvican-Lewis, Laura; Saunders, Philo; Thompson, Kevin.

    In: Frontiers in Physiology, Vol. 7, No. DEC, 591, 12.2016, p. 1-24.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Effect of Environmental and Feedback Interventions on Pacing Profiles in Cycling

    T2 - A Meta-Analysis

    AU - Davies, Michael

    AU - Clark, Bradley

    AU - Welvaert, Marijke

    AU - Skorski, Sabrina

    AU - Garvican-Lewis, Laura

    AU - Saunders, Philo

    AU - Thompson, Kevin

    PY - 2016/12

    Y1 - 2016/12

    N2 - In search of their optimal performance athletes will alter their pacing strategy according to intrinsic and extrinsic physiological, psychological and environmental factors. However, the effect of some of these variables on pacing and exercise performance remains somewhat unclear. Therefore, the aim of this meta-analysis was to provide an overview as to how manipulation of different extrinsic factors affects pacing strategy and exercise performance. Only self-paced exercise studies that provided control and intervention group(s), reported trial variance for power output, disclosed the type of feedback received or withheld, and where time-trial power output data could be segmented into start, middle and end sections; were included in the meta-analysis. Studies with similar themes were grouped together to determine the mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) between control and intervention trials for: hypoxia, hyperoxia, heat-stress, pre-cooling, and various forms of feedback. A total of 26 studies with cycling as the exercise modality were included in the meta-analysis. Of these, four studies manipulated oxygen availability, eleven manipulated heat-stress, four implemented pre-cooling interventions and seven studies manipulated various forms of feedback. Mean power output (MPO) was significantly reduced in the middle and end sections (p < 0.05), but not the start section of hypoxia and heat-stress trials compared to the control trials. In contrast, there was no significant change in trial or section MPO for hyperoxic or pre-cooling conditions compared to the control condition (p > 0.05). Negative feedback improved overall trial MPO and MPO in the middle section of trials (p < 0.05), while informed feedback improved overall trial MPO (p < 0.05). However, positive, neutral and no feedback had no significant effect on overall trial or section MPO (p > 0.05). The available data suggests exercise regulation in hypoxia and heat-stress is delayed in the start section of trials, before significant reductions in MPO occur in the middle and end of the trial. Additionally, negative feedback involving performance deception may afford an upward shift in MPO in the middle section of the trial improving overall performance. Finally, performance improvements can be retained when participants are informed of the deception.

    AB - In search of their optimal performance athletes will alter their pacing strategy according to intrinsic and extrinsic physiological, psychological and environmental factors. However, the effect of some of these variables on pacing and exercise performance remains somewhat unclear. Therefore, the aim of this meta-analysis was to provide an overview as to how manipulation of different extrinsic factors affects pacing strategy and exercise performance. Only self-paced exercise studies that provided control and intervention group(s), reported trial variance for power output, disclosed the type of feedback received or withheld, and where time-trial power output data could be segmented into start, middle and end sections; were included in the meta-analysis. Studies with similar themes were grouped together to determine the mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) between control and intervention trials for: hypoxia, hyperoxia, heat-stress, pre-cooling, and various forms of feedback. A total of 26 studies with cycling as the exercise modality were included in the meta-analysis. Of these, four studies manipulated oxygen availability, eleven manipulated heat-stress, four implemented pre-cooling interventions and seven studies manipulated various forms of feedback. Mean power output (MPO) was significantly reduced in the middle and end sections (p < 0.05), but not the start section of hypoxia and heat-stress trials compared to the control trials. In contrast, there was no significant change in trial or section MPO for hyperoxic or pre-cooling conditions compared to the control condition (p > 0.05). Negative feedback improved overall trial MPO and MPO in the middle section of trials (p < 0.05), while informed feedback improved overall trial MPO (p < 0.05). However, positive, neutral and no feedback had no significant effect on overall trial or section MPO (p > 0.05). The available data suggests exercise regulation in hypoxia and heat-stress is delayed in the start section of trials, before significant reductions in MPO occur in the middle and end of the trial. Additionally, negative feedback involving performance deception may afford an upward shift in MPO in the middle section of the trial improving overall performance. Finally, performance improvements can be retained when participants are informed of the deception.

    KW - Cycling

    KW - Deception

    KW - Feedback

    KW - Heat-stress

    KW - Hyperoxia

    KW - Hypoxia

    KW - Pacing

    KW - Pre-cooling

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85009259816&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.mendeley.com/research/effect-environmental-feedback-interventions-pacing-profiles-cycling-metaanalysis-1

    U2 - 10.3389/fphys.2016.00591

    DO - 10.3389/fphys.2016.00591

    M3 - Article

    VL - 7

    SP - 1

    EP - 24

    JO - Frontiers in Physiology

    JF - Frontiers in Physiology

    SN - 1664-042X

    IS - DEC

    M1 - 591

    ER -