| Title |
Inspiratory muscle training improves 100 and 200 m swimming performance
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Applied Physiology, October 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00421-009-1228-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Andrew E. Kilding, Sarah Brown, Alison K. McConnell |
| Abstract |
Inspiratory muscle training (IMT) has been shown to improve time trial performance in competitive athletes across a range of sports. Surprisingly, however, the effect of specific IMT on surface swimming performance remains un-investigated. Similarly, it is not known whether any ergogenic influence of IMT upon swimming performance is confined to specific race distances. To determine the influence of IMT upon swimming performance over 3 competitive distances, 16 competitive club-level swimmers were assigned at random to either an experimental (pressure threshold IMT) or sham IMT placebo control group. Participants performed a series of physiological and performance tests, before and following 6 weeks of IMT, including (1) an incremental swim test to the limit of tolerance to determine lactate, heart rate and perceived exertion responses; (2) standard measures of lung function (forced vital capacity, forced expiratory volume in 1 s, peak expiratory flow) and maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP); and (3) 100, 200 and 400 m swim time trials. Training utilised a hand-held pressure threshold device and consisted of 30 repetitions, twice per day. Relative to control, the IMT group showed the following percentage changes in swim times: 100 m, -1.70% (90% confidence limits, +/-1.4%), 200 m, -1.5% (+/-1.0), and 400 m, 0.6% (+/-1.2). Large effects were observed for MIP and rates of perceived exertion. In conclusion, 6 weeks of IMT has a small positive effect on swimming performance in club-level trained swimmers in events shorter than 400 m. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 50% |
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 254 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Croatia | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 243 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 49 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 46 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 26 | 10% |
| Researcher | 22 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 15 | 6% |
| Other | 45 | 18% |
| Unknown | 51 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 71 | 28% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 57 | 22% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 36 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 5% |
| Psychology | 6 | 2% |
| Other | 14 | 6% |
| Unknown | 58 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 June 2022.
All research outputs
#14,277,392
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#2,651
of 4,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,695
of 106,163 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#24
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,345 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 106,163 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.