Heat Reacclimation using Exercise or Hot Water Immersion

INTRODUCTION The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of exercise versus hot water immersion heat reacclimation (HRA) protocols. METHODS Twenty-four participants completed a heat stress test (HST; 33°C, 65% RH), which involved cycling at a power output equivalent to 1.5 W·kg-1 for 35 min whereby thermophysiological variables were measured. This was followed by a graded exercise test until exhaustion. HST1 was before a 10-d controlled hyperthermia (CH) heat acclimation (HA) protocol and HST2 immediately after. Participants completed HST3 after a 28-d decay period without heat exposure and were then separated into three groups to complete a 5-d HRA protocol: a control group (CH-CON, n = 8); a hot water immersion group (CH-HWI, n = 8), and a controlled hyperthermia group (CH-CH, n = 8). This was followed by HST4. RESULTS Compared with HST1, time to exhaustion and thermal comfort improved; resting rectal temperature (Tre), end of exercise Tre, and mean skin temperature (Tsk) were lower; and whole body sweat rate (WBSR) was greater in HST2 for all groups (P < 0.05). After a 28-d decay, only WBSR, time to exhaustion, and mean Tsk returned to pre-HA values. Of these decayed variables, only WBSR was reinstated after HRA; the improvement was observed in both the CH-CH and the CH-HWI groups (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION The data suggest that HRA protocol may not be necessary for cardiovascular and thermal adaptations within a 28-d decay period, as long as a 10-d CH-HA protocol has successfully induced these physiological adaptations. For sweat adaptations, a 5-d CH or HWI-HRA protocol can reinstate the lost adaptations.