Carbohydrate Mouth Rinsing Enhances High Intensity Time Trial Performance Following Prolonged Cycling

Abstract

There is good evidence that mouth rinsing with carbohydrate (CHO) solutions can enhance endurance performance (≥30 min). The impact of a CHO mouth rinse on sprint performance has been less consistent, suggesting that CHO may confer benefits in conditions of ‘metabolic strain’. To test this hypothesis, the current study examined the impact of late-exercise mouth rinsing on sprint performance. Secondly, we investigated the effects of a protein mouth rinse (PRO) on performance. Eight trained male cyclists participated in three trials consisting of 120 min of constant-load cycling (55% Wmax) followed by a 30 km computer-simulated time trial, during which only water was provided. Following 15 min of muscle function assessment, 10 min of constant-load cycling (3 min at 35% Wmax, 7 min at 55% Wmax) was performed. This was immediately followed by a 2 km time trial. Subjects rinsed with 25 mL of CHO, PRO, or placebo (PLA) at min 5:00 and 14:30 of the 15 min muscle function phase, and min 8:00 of the 10-min constant-load cycling. Magnitude-based inferential statistics were used to analyze the effects of the mouth rinse on 2-km time trial performance and the following physiological parameters: Maximum Voluntary Contract (MVC), Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE), Heart Rate (HR), and blood glucose levels. The primary finding was that CHO ‘likely’ enhanced performance vs. PLA (3.8%), whereas differences between PRO and PLA were unclear (0.4%). These data demonstrate that late-race performance is enhanced by a CHO rinse, but not PRO, under challenging metabolic conditions. More data should be acquired before this strategy is recommended for the later stages of cycling competition under more practical conditions, such as when carbohydrates are supplemented throughout the preceding minutes/hours of exercise.

Computational and Complex Network Modeling for Analysis of Sprinter Athletes’ Performance in Track Field Tests

“…Thus, we associate it with carbohydrate depletion, which influences the individuals’ capacity to sustain free running. This result, extracted by our analysis, is related to other investigations such as the importance of R as a fitness indicator, even in untrained individuals ( Ramos-Jiménez et al, 2008 ), the metabolic role of R during exercise in trained athletes ( Goedecke et al, 2000 ), and carbohydrates’ role in helping athletes to improve performance ( Egan and D’Agostino, 2016 ; Luden et al, 2016 ). During tethered running, the eigenvalue metric reached its maximum for velocity in the Time Limit test.…”

Cognitive Performance Enhancement Induced by Caffeine, Carbohydrate and Guarana Mouth Rinsing during Submaximal Exercise

“…Finally, magnitude based inferences have also revealed that CHO MR leads to a likely decrease in RPE for the same power output compared to PL. This result is very interesting since results are mixed and most studies have failed to observe benefits from CHO MR [ 9 , 44 , 75 , 76 , 77 ] and CAF MR [ 18 , 78 ] on perception of effort. Only a few studies have reported that CAF and CHO MR could lead to a decrease in RPE [ 25 , 26 , 27 ] suggesting that CHO and CAF MR induce a decrease in subjective perception of effort, allowing participants to produce more power with the same degree of discomfort.…”

“…Effect sizes for GLM were calculated using partial eta square ( ɳ p 2 ). Secondly, to specifically test effects of nutritional supplements and RPE, we also reported probabilistic magnitude-based inferences about all the variables using methods described by Hopkins et al [ 43 ] which has been applied in several recent nutritional studies [ 21 , 44 , 45 ]. Data were log-transformed prior to analyses to reduce bias arising from non-uniformity of error.…”

Quantifying the Effect of Carbohydrate Mouth Rinsing on Exercise Performance

“…mean and standard deviation or standard error). The following studies were excluded from the analysis; Beaven et al (3) because raw data was not available for the placebo condition (an attempt was made to contact the author), Rollo et al (39) because the performance outcome was self-selected running speed which is not in itself a performance measure per se that could be compared to the outcomes of other studies in the same sub-analysis, Rollo et al (40) because CMR was not compared to a placebo mouth rinse, Rollo et al (review) because it was a review article, and three studies were excluded because the mouth rinse efficacy could have been influenced by a prior exercise (1,30,36). An overview of the search strategy is outlined in Fig 1. The effectiveness of the mouth rinsing was quantified by determining the effect size for each variable, which can be categorised as small (0.2), moderate (0.5) or high (0.8).…”