English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Purpose:  This study compared the immediate effects of smoking on cardiorespiratory responses to dynamic arm and leg exercises.   Methods: This randomized crossover study recruited 14 college students. Each participant underwent two sets of arm-cranking (AC) and leg-cycling (LC) exercise tests. The testing sequences of the control trial (participants refrained from smoking for 8 h before testing) and the experimental trial (participants smoked two cigarettes immediately before testing) were randomly chosen. We observed immediate changes in pulmonary function and heart rate variability after smoking and before the exercise test. The participants then underwent graded exercise tests of their arms and legs until reaching exhaustion. We compared the peak work achieved and time to exhaustion during the exercise tests with various cardiorespiratory indices [i.e., heart rate, oxygen consumption (VO 2 ), minute ventilation (V E )]. The differences between the smoking and control trials were calculated using paired  t -tests. For the exercise test periods, VO 2 , heart rate, and V E  values were calculated at every 10% increment of the maximal effort time. The main effects of the time and trial, as well as their trial-by-time (4 × 10) interaction effects on the outcome measures, were investigated using repeated measure ANOVA with trend analysis.   Results:  5 min after smoking, the participants exhibited reduced forced vital capacities and forced expiratory volumes in the first second ( P  < 0.05), in addition to elevated resting heart rates ( P  < 0.001). The high-frequency, low-frequency, and the total power of the heart rate variability were also reduced ( P  < 0.05) at rest. For the exercise test periods, smoking reduced the time to exhaustion ( P  = 0.005) and the ventilatory threshold ( P  < 0.05) in the LC tests, whereas no significant effects were observed in the AC tests. A trend analysis revealed a significant trial-by-time interaction effect for heart rate, VO 2 , and V E  during the graded exercise test (all  P  < 0.001). Lower VO 2  and V E  levels were exhibited in the exercise response of the smoking trial than in those of the control LC trials, whereas no discernable inter-trial difference was observed in the AC trials. Moreover, the differences in heart rate and V E  response between the LC and AC exercises were significantly smaller after the participants smoked.   Conclusion:  This study verified that smoking significantly decreased performance and cardiorespiratory responses to leg exercises. However, the negative effects of smoking on arm exercise performance were not as pronounced.

Immediate Effects of Smoking on Cardiorespiratory Responses During Dynamic Exercise: Arm Vs. Leg Ergometry