Cited by 7Cardiovascular and exercise physiologyChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchRespiratory Support and Mechanisms

Difference in breathing strategies during exercise between trained elderly men and women

Deruelle, F., Nourry, C., Mucci, P., Bart, F., Grosbois, J. M., Lensel, G. h., Fabre, C.·2008·Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports

Abstract

This study compared the ventilatory responses and exercise tidal flow‐volume (Vt) loops during exercise in order to analyze the influence of gender on breathing strategy in a fit aging population. Sixteen trained elderly men (63.0±2.9 years) and eight peer women (62.3 ± 5.5 years) performed an incremental test on a cycle ergometer. At 90% maximal oxygen consumption (V̇O 2max), the women presented a significantly higher expiratory flow limitation (EFL) than the men (38 ± 10 vs 17 ± 8% of Vt, respectively) (P<0.01) and a lower value of expiratory reserve volume relative to forced vital capacity (FVC) compared with the men (16.8 ± 5.3% vs 23.0 ± 5.2%, respectively) (P<0.05). Inspiratory reserve volume relative to FVC was significantly higher in women than men at 50% (P<0.05), 70% (P<0.01) and 90%V̇O 2max (25.2 ± 5.4% vs 12.2 ± 4.2%, respectively, at 90%V̇O 2max) (P<0.01). Mechanical ventilatory constraints occurred in trained elderly men and women. However, different breathing strategies were observed relative to gender. A significantly higher EFL was measured in women, whereas men rather presented a dynamic hyperinflation. This specific breathing strategy measured in trained elderly women would induce lower ventilatory efficiency than in peer men.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1600-0838.2007.00641.x

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • These sex differences (mainly smaller lungs and maximal flow rates in women) may affect dynamic volumes because fit women may suffer from expiratory flow limitation that induces an increase in EELV.

    “These differences (mainly smaller lungs and maximal flow rates in women) may also affect dynamic volumes because fit women may suffer from expiratory flow limitation that induces an increase in EELV.132–134”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Deruelle, F., Nourry, C., Mucci, P., Bart, F., Grosbois, J. M., Lensel, G. H., & Fabre, C.
Affiliations
Université de Lille (FR)
Corresponding author
Deruelle, F.
Venue
Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-06-06
Volume
18
Issue
2
Pages
213-220
ISSN
  • 0905-7188 (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-0838
OpenAlex
W2162936257
Cited by
7
References
4
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Respiratory Support and Mechanisms
Keywords
breathing strategies, ventilatory response to exercise, expiratory flow limitation, expiratory reserve volume, inspiratory reserve volume, ventilatory efficiency, sex differences, aging, dynamic hyperinflation, VO2max
MeSH terms
Aged, Exercise Test, Expiratory Reserve Volume, Female, France, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Oxygen Consumption, Vital Capacity, Exercise, Respiratory Mechanics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review