Matthew T. Wittbrodt

Fluid Replacement Attenuates Physiological Strain Resulting From Mild Hypohydration Without Impacting Cognitive Performance

PURPOSE The impact of mild hypohydration on physiological responses and cognitive performance following exercise-heat stress (EHS) were examined compared with conditions when fluids were ingested ad libitum (AL) or replaced to match sweat losses (FR). METHODS Twelve unacclimatized, recreationally-active men (22.2 ± 2.4 y) completed 50 min cycling (60%VO2peak) in the heat (32°C; 65% RH) under three conditions: no fluid (NF), AL, and FR. Before and after EHS, a cognitive battery was completed: Trail making, perceptual vigilance, pattern comparison, match-to-sample, and letter-digit recognition tests. RESULTS Hypohydration during NF was greater compared with AL and FR (NF: -1.5 ± 0.6; AL: -0.3 ± 0.8; FR: -0.1 ± 0.3% body mass loss) resulting in higher core temperature (by 0.4, 0.5 °C), heart rate (by 13 and 15 b·min-1), and physiological strain (by 1.3, 1.5) at the end of EHS compared with AL and FR, respectively. Cognitive performance (response time and accuracy) was not altered by fluid condition; however, mean response time improved (p < .05) for letter-digit recognition (by 56.7 ± 85.8 ms or 3.8%; p < .05) and pattern comparison (by 80.6 ± 57.4 ms or 7.1%; p < .001), but mean accuracy decreased in trail making (by 1.2 ± 1.4%; p = .01) after EHS (across all conditions). CONCLUSIONS For recreational athletes, fluid intake effectively mitigated physiological strain induced by mild hypohydration; however, mild hypohydration resulting from EHS elicited no adverse changes in cognitive performance.

Biological variation of plasma osmolality obtained with capillary versus venous blood.

Abstract Background: Plasma osmolality (POsm) is a gold standard to assess hydration status but requires venipuncture. POsm obtained by lancing a digit, a source of capillary puncture blood (CAP), has not been validated. This study compared POsm from CAP versus venous blood (VEN) and validated its sensitivity to detect dehydration. Methods: Healthy young adults (Study A: n=20 men, 22 women; Study B: n=23 men, 23 women) participated. In Study A, CAP and VEN were compared under controlled euhydration meeting dietary reference intakes for water (3.7 L men, 2.7 L women). In Study B, CAP was assessed for sensitivity to detect dehydration with receiver operating characteristic analysis over two 24 h periods: euhydration for 24 h followed by water restriction over 24 h. POsm was measured using freezing point depression. Results: For all subjects, CAP POsm (283.0±3.9 mOsm/kg) was not significantly different (p=0.07) from VEN (284.2±3.5) during euhydration and met analytical goals for individuality and heterogeneity. When outliers (n=3) were eliminated, mean difference was –1.6 (±3.2) lower (p<0.01) with CAP. Fluid restriction increased (p<0.001) CAP POsm (284.0±4.4 to 292.8±5.2 mOsm/kg), achieving excellent accuracy (0.92) and sensitivity (89.1%) to predict mild dehydration (2% body mass loss). Conclusions: POsm via CAP exhibited similar coefficients of variation and analytical goals compared to VEN combined with excellent accuracy and sensitivity to detect dehydration. Although CAP values were approximately 2 mOsm/kg lower than VEN, CAP appears an adequate substitute for tracking changes in non-clinical settings.