Cardiovascular and metabolic responses during indoor climbing and laboratory cycling exercise in advanced and élite climbers

Limonta, Eloisa; Brighenti, Alfredo; Rampichini, Susanna; Cè, Emiliano; Schena, Federico; Esposito, Fabio

doi:10.1007/s00421-017-3779-6

Cited by 17 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The emphasis on physical capacity of the shoulders as an important determinant for climbing ability, and the further focus on arm, hand and finger strength is in line with previous studies, 11,12,19,20 but specification of relative contributions is novel. Similarly, flexibility and aerobic capacity contributing to climbing ability has previously received less support; 2,4,11,20,21 however, a recent report indicated that climbing taxes aerobic capacity sufficient to stress VO2max, 27 and as such this favours a high aerobic capacity in climbers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Physical and Physiological Determinants of Rock Climbing

MacKenzie¹,

Monaghan²,

Masson³

et al. 2020

International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Rock climbing performance relies on many characteristics. Herein, the authors identified the physical and physiological determinants of peak performance in rock climbing across the range from lower grade to elite. Methods: Forty four male and 33 female climbers with onsight maximal climbing grades 5a–8a and 5a–7b+, respectively, were tested for physical, physiological, and psychological characteristics (independent variables) that were correlated and modeled by multiple regression and principal component analysis to identify the determinants of rock climbing ability. Results: In males, 23 of 47 variables correlated with climbing ability (P < .05, Pearson correlation coefficients .773–.340), including shoulder endurance, hand and finger strength, shoulder power endurance, hip flexibility, lower-arm grip strength, shoulder power, upper-arm strength, core-body endurance, upper-body aerobic endurance, hamstrings and lower-back flexibility, aerobic endurance, and open-hand finger strength. In females, 10 of 47 variables correlated with climbing ability (P < .05, Pearson correlation coefficients .742–.482): shoulder endurance and power, lower-arm grip strength, balance, aerobic endurance, and arm span. Principal component analysis and univariate multiple regression identified the main explanatory variables. In both sexes, shoulder power and endurance measured as maximum pull-ups, average arm crank power, and bent-arm hang, emerged as the main determinants (P < .01; adjusted R2 = .77 in males and .62 in females). In males, finger pincer (P = .07) and grip strength also had trends (P = .09) toward significant effects. Finally, in test-of-principle training studies, they trained to increase main determinants 42% to 67%; this improved climbing ability 2 to 3 grades. Conclusions: Shoulder power and endurance majorly determines maximal climbing. Finger, hand, and arm strength, core-body endurance, aerobic endurance, flexibility, and balance are important secondary determinants.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Physical and Physiological Determinants of Rock Climbing

MacKenzie¹,

Monaghan²,

Masson³

et al. 2020

International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Lastly the inability to measure VO2 limits the ability to interpret HR data and estimate cardiovascular demands. Heart rates may have been elevated due to the use of repetitive isometric contractions which may cause a disproportionate rise in HR compared to VO2 seen in climbers (Limonta et al, 2018;Mermier et al, 1997;Sheel, 2004).…”

Section: Exclusive Boulderingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Measuring VO2 is the standard for assessing aerobic fitness though the linear relationship between heart rate (HR) and VO2 allow for monitoring HR as an effective way to assess physical activity (Limonta et al, 2018). The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, it should be noted that these heart rates may be slightly exaggerated due to a disproportionate rise in HR compared to VO2. This disproportionate rise in HR has been attributed to the repetitive use of isometric contractions during climbing (Limonta et al, 2018;Mermier et al, 1997;Sheel, 2004). Given that much of the previous research has focused on elite climbers, it is unclear if recreational climbers have similar heart rate responses during climbing and if so what percentage of their time in a climbing gym is spent in these heart rate ranges.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Heart Rate Response, Duration, Grip Strength, and Anthropometric Characteristics in Recreational Indoor Rock Climbers

Smetanka

Armenta

Nessler

et al. 2020

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recreational indoor rock climbing continues to increase in popularity as the inclusion of climbing in the 2020 Olympics approaches. Despite the popularity of the sport there is a lack in research regarding the cardiovascular responses of recreational indoor climbers. Additionally, the importance of body composition and grip strength has been established in elite climbers yet has been overlooked in recreational climbers. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to characterize the physiological and anthropometric characteristics of recreational indoor climbers. We hypothesized that heart rates and climbing durations would meet the standards set by the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) and Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for eliciting health benefits and that grip strength would show signs of fatigue over the course of a typical session. One hundred and twenty-one male and female adult recreational climbers participated in this study. Following informed consent, subjects completed a questionnaire and were instrumented with a heart rate monitor (Polar V800) which recorded heart rate and duration. A pre-climb and post-climb grip strength evaluation was performed using a hand grip dynamometer to assess maximal grip strength and calculate strength to mass ratio (SMR) and fatigue. Participants were 30.9 ± 8.3 years old and had participated in climbing for 5.6 ± 6.5 years. Average heart rates during climbing sessions was 122.3 ± 14.5 bpm and session duration was 90.6 ± 31.3 minutes. Mean grip strength was 49.9 ± 11.2 kg while SMR was 0.71 ± 0.14 and fatigue was 13.1 ± 11.6%. Results from this study suggest that recreational indoor climbers achieve heart rates in the ranges set by the CDC and ACSM. Heart rates are sustained long enough to contribute toward weekly exercise recommendations. Grip strength data suggested that forearm muscle fatigue may limit climbing durations.

show abstract

“…This type of ergometer enables the analysis of physiological responses to climbing in a controlled setting. Treadwalls can be altered to assess the effect of speed or inclination at submaximal or maximal intensity on physiological response in climbers (Watts and Drobish, 1998;España-Romero et al, 2009;Fryer et al, 2018;Limonta et al, 2018;Heil, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Height on Perceived Exertion and Physiological Responses for Climbers of Differing Ability Levels

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to examine differences in perceived exertion (RPE) and physiological responses for climbers of different abilities completing an identical route low and high above the ground. Materials and Methods: Forty-two male (N = 18) and female (N = 24) sport climbers divided into three groups, lower-grade (N = 14), intermediate (N = 14), and advanced climbers (N = 14), completed two visits to a climbing gym, separated by 7 days. In a random order, the climbers completed a close-to-the-ground ascent (treadwall) and climb to height (climbing gym). Immediately after the test, climbers provided their RPE (6-20). Indirect calorimetry was used to assess physiological response during the ascent and recovery. Results: The mean (±standard deviation) RPE was higher for lower-grade climbers when ascending the route on the wall (RPE = 12 ± 1) when compared to the treadwall route (RPE = 11 ± 1, P = 0.040; d = 0.41). For all ability groups, the physiological response was higher on the climbing gym wall as opposed to the treadwall: ventilation (P = 0.003, η p 2 = 0.199), heart rate (HR) (P = 0.005, η p 2 = 0.189), energy cost (EC) (P = 0.000, η p 2 = 0.501). The RPE demonstrated a moderate relationship with physiological variables (R 2 = 0.14 to R 2 = 0.45). Conclusion: Climbing to height induced a greater metabolic stress than climbing at a low height (treadwall) and led to higher RPE for lower-grade climbers. In this study, RPE appeared to be a good proxy measure of the physiological demands for advanced climbers but not for intermediate and lower-grade climbers. Therefore, using RPE in climbing with less experienced athletes may perhaps overestimate actual exercise intensity and should be interpreted carefully.

show abstract

Cardiovascular and metabolic responses during indoor climbing and laboratory cycling exercise in advanced and élite climbers

Cited by 17 publications

References 30 publications

Physical and Physiological Determinants of Rock Climbing

Physical and Physiological Determinants of Rock Climbing

Heart Rate Response, Duration, Grip Strength, and Anthropometric Characteristics in Recreational Indoor Rock Climbers

Effect of Height on Perceived Exertion and Physiological Responses for Climbers of Differing Ability Levels

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About