getCITED   
  Home     Search     Add Content     Reports     Help  
Edit Publication | Edit Contributors | Delete Publication | Edit References | Edit Citations
Add to Bookstack | Show Bookstack | Change Bookstack

Comparison of maximal oxygen consumption with oral and nasal breathing

Post a Comment
CONTRIBUTORS:
  Author Morton, A. R.
  Author King, K.
  Author Papalia, S.
  Author Goodman, C.
  Author Turley, K. R.
  Author Wilmore, J. H. (Texas A&M University College Station)
JOURNAL:
  Australian Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport (AJSMS), 27(3), 51 - 55.
YEAR: 1995
PUB TYPE: Journal Article
SUBJECT(S): respiration; oxygen-consumption; mouth; nose; comparative-study
DISCIPLINE: No discipline assigned
HTTP: https://secure.sportquest.com/su.cfm?articleno=390520&title=390520
LANGUAGE: English
PUB ID: 103-342-876 (Last edited on 2002/02/27 18:44:10 US/Mountain)
SPONSOR(S):
 
ABSTRACT:
The major cause of exercise-induced asthma (EIA) is thought to be the drying and cooling of the airways during the 'conditioning' of the inspired air. Nasal breathing increases the respiratory system's ability to warm and humidify the inspired air compared to oral breathing and reduced the drying and cooling effects of the increased ventilation during exercise. This will reduce the severity of EIA provoked by a given intensity and duration of exercise. The percentage decrease in maximal ventilation with nose-only breathing compare to mouth and mouth plus nose breathing was three times the percentage decrease in maximal oxygen consumption. The pattern of nose-only breathing at maximal work showed a small reduction in tidal volume and large reduction in breathing frequency. Nasal breathing resulted in a reduction in FEO2 and an increase in FECO2. While breathing through the nose-only, all subjects could attain a work intensity great enough to produce an aerobic training effect (based on heart rate and percentage of VO2 max).
STATISTICS
Click on # to view
 Citations  
 References  
 Comments  
 Quality      0/0.00 
 Interest      0/0.00 
 View(er)s   3/407 
Quality
  N/A
High
  7
  6
  5
  4
  3
  2
  1
Low
Interest
  N/A
High
  7
  6
  5
  4
  3
  2
  1
Low
Prev | Next

    ABOUT getCITED   |    CONTACT US   |    USER INFO   |    PREFERENCES   |    PRIVACY   |    LOG IN   
Comments? Suggestions? Send them to feedback@getCITED.org.

Copyright © 2000-2006 getCITED Inc. All Rights Reserved.