4.6 Review

Breath Tools: A Synthesis of Evidence-Based Breathing Strategies to Enhance Human Running

Journal

FRONTIERS IN PHYSIOLOGY
Volume 13, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2022.813243

Keywords

breathing pattern; coupling; running; techniques; strategies; respiration; ventilation

Categories

Funding

  1. Austrian Federal Ministry for Transport, Innovation and Technology
  2. Austrian Federal Ministry for Digital and Economic Affairs
  3. federal state of Salzburg under the research program COMETCompetence Centers for Excellent Technologies-in the project Digital Motion in Sports, Fitness and Well-being (DiMo)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Running is a popular sporting hobby, but a significant percentage of runners may experience exercise-induced dyspnoea. While deep breathing techniques have proven benefits at rest, it is unclear if they can improve respiratory limitations or performance during exercise.
Running is among the most popular sporting hobbies and often chosen specifically for intrinsic psychological benefits. However, up to 40% of runners may experience exercise-induced dyspnoea as a result of cascading physiological phenomena, possibly causing negative psychological states or barriers to participation. Breathing techniques such as slow, deep breathing have proven benefits at rest, but it is unclear if they can be used during exercise to address respiratory limitations or improve performance. While direct experimental evidence is limited, diverse findings from exercise physiology and sports science combined with anecdotal knowledge from Yoga, meditation, and breathwork suggest that many aspects of breathing could be improved via purposeful strategies. Hence, we sought to synthesize these disparate sources to create a new theoretical framework called Breath Tools proposing breathing strategies for use during running to improve tolerance, performance, and lower barriers to long-term enjoyment.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available