Background: The purpose of this study was to investigate effects of heat acclimatization (HAz) followed by heat acclimation (HA), and intermittent heat training (IHT) on time-trial performance. Hypothesis: Time-trial performance will improve after HA and will further improve with twice a week of IHT. Study Design: Interventional study. Level of Evidence: Level 3. Methods: A total of 26 male athletes (mean ± SD; age, 35 ± 12 years; body mass, 72.8 ± 8.9 kg; peak oxygen consumption [VO2peak], 57.3 ± 6.7 mL·kg−1·min−1) completed five 4-km time trials (baseline, post-HAz, post-HA, post-IHT4, post-IHT8) in the heat (ambient temperature, 35.4°C ± 0.3°C; relative humidity, 46.7% ± 1.2%) on a motorized treadmill. After baseline time trial, participants performed HAz (109 ± 10 days) followed by post-HAz time trial. Then, participants completed 5 days of HA, which involved exercising to induce hyperthermia (38.50°C-39.75°C) for 60 minutes. Participants were then divided into 3 groups and completed IHT either twice per week (IHTMAX), once per week (IHTMIN), or not at all (IHTCON) over an 8-week period. The exercise used for the IHT matched the HA. Four-kilometer time trials were performed after 4 weeks (post-IHT4) and 8 weeks of IHT (post-IHT8). Results: Time trial was faster in post-HA (17.98 ± 2.51 minutes) compared with baseline (18.61 ± 3.06 minutes; P = 0.037) and post-HAz (18.66 ± 3.12 minutes; P = 0.023). Percentage change in time trial was faster in IHTMAX (−3.9% ± 5.2%) compared with IHTCON (11.5% ± 16.9%) ( P = 0.020) and approached statistical significance with large effect (effect size = 0.96) compared with IHTMIN (1.6% ± 6.2%; P = 0.059) at post-IHT8. Additionally, IHTMAX (−2.2% ± 4.2%) was faster than IHTCON (3.6% ± 6.9%) ( P = 0.05) at post-IHT4. Conclusion: These results indicate that HA after HAz induces additional improvement in time-trial performance. IHT twice per week shows improvement after 8 weeks, while once per week maintains performance for 8 weeks. No IHT results in a loss of adaptations after 4 weeks and even greater losses after 8 weeks. Clinical Relevance: HA after HAz improves time-trial performance, twice a week of IHT improves performance further, and once a week of IHT maintains performance for at least 8 weeks.

No abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of heat acclimation (HA) on thirst levels, sweat rate, and percentage of body mass loss (%BML), and changes in fluid intake factors throughout HA induction. Twenty-eight male endurance athletes (mean ± SD; age, 35 ± 12 years; body mass, 73.0 ± 8.9 kg; maximal oxygen consumption, 57.4 ± 6.8 ml·kg−1·min−1) completed 60 min of exercise in a euhydrated state at 58.9 ± 2.3% velocity of maximal oxygen consumption in the heat (ambient temperature, 35.0 ± 1.3 °C; relative humidity, 48.0 ± 1.3%) prior to and following HA where thirst levels, sweat rate, and %BML were measured. Then, participants performed 5 days of HA while held at hyperthermia (38.50–39.75 °C) for 60 min with fluid provided ad libitum. Sweat volume, %BML, thirst levels, and fluid intake were measured for each session. Thirst levels were significantly lower following HA (pre, 4 ± 1; post, 3 ± 1, p < .001). Sweat rate (pre, 1.76 ± 0.42 L/hr; post, 2.00 ± 0.60 L/hr, p = .039) and %BML (pre, 2.66 ± 0.53%; post, 2.98 ± 0.83%, p = .049) were significantly greater following HA. During HA, thirst levels decreased (Day 1, 4 ± 1; Day 2, 3 ± 2; Day 3, 3 ± 2; Day 4, 3 ± 1; Day 5, 3 ± 1; p < .001). However, sweat volume (Day 1, 2.34 ± 0.67 L; Day 2, 2.49 ± 0.58 L; Day 3, 2.67 ± 0.63 L; Day 4, 2.74 ± 0.61 L; Day 5, 2.74 ± 0.91 L; p = .010) and fluid intake (Day 1, 1.20 ± 0.45 L; Day 2, 1.52 ± 0.58 L; Day 3, 1.69 ± 0.63 L; Day 4, 1.65 ± 0.58 L; Day 5, 1.74 ± 0.51 L; p < .001) increased. In conclusion, thirst levels were lower following HA even though sweat rate and %BML were higher. Thirst levels decreased while sweat volume and fluid intake increased during HA induction. Thus, HA should be one of the factors to consider when planning hydration strategies.

The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of heat acclimatization (HAz) followed by heat acclimation (HA) on physiological adaptations. 25 male endurance athletes (age 36 ± 12 y, height 178.8 ± 6.39 cm, body mass 73.03 ± 8.97 kg, and VO2peak 57.5 ± 7.0 mL·kg−1·min−1) completed HAz and HA. HAz was 3 months of self-directed summer training. In the laboratory, a 5-day HA prescribed exercise to target a hyperthermic zone (HZHA) of Trec between 38.50 and 39.75 °C for 60 min. Exercise trials were 60 min of running (59% ± 2% VO2peak) in an environmental chamber (wet bulb globe temperature 29.53 ± 0.63 °C) and administered at: baseline, post-HAz, and post-HAz+HA. Measured variables included internal body temperature (Trec), heart rate (HR), and sweat rate (SR). Repeated measure ANOVAs and post hoc comparisons were used to assess statistically significant (p < 0.05) differences. Trec was lower post-HAz+HA (38.03 ± 0.39 °C) than post-HAz (38.25 ± 0.42 °C, p = 0.009) and baseline (38.29 ± 0.37 °C, p = 0.005). There were no differences between baseline and post-HAz (p = 0.479) in Trec. HR was lower post-HAz (143 ± 12 bpm, p = 0.002) and post-HAz+HA (134 ± 11 bpm, p < 0.001) than baseline (138 ± 14 bpm). HR was lower post-HAz+HA than post-HAz (p = 0.013). SR was higher post-HAz+HA (1.93 ± 0.47 L·h−1) than post-HAz (1.76 ± 0.43 L·h−1, p = 0.027). Combination HAz and HA increased physiological outcomes above HAz. This method can be used to improve performance and safety in addition to HAz alone.