Journal of Sport and Health Science最新文献

Background: Interest in clothing that reflects far infrared (FIR) radiation naturally emitted by the body during and after exercise has increased based on the assumption that this can increase arterial and venous blood flow. Indeed, in vitro and animal model research seems to report promising effects of FIR on the nitric oxide pathway and microcirculation. However, to date, there are no well controlled studies investigating the effect of FIR garments on resting microvascular and macrovascular function in humans. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine the acute effects of wearing FIR arm garments on vascular function.

Methods: Thirty-one male recreational sport practitioners (4.9 ± 3.3 h of sport/week; 32.1 ± 9.5 years; 178.6 ± 7.9 cm; 74.1 ± 11.2 kg; 23.2 ± 2.5 kg/m² (mean ± SD)) completed four visits: repeatability measurements (two sessions), placebo, and FIR conditions in random order. Measurements (i.e., without arm garment) of brachial artery diameter and blood flow, carotid-radial pulse wave velocity (CR-PWV), as well as total-, oxy-, and deoxy-hemoglobin were completed after 15 min of rest and repeated after wearing FIR or placebo arm garments for 25 min, 40 min, and 50 min. Two skin sensors were positioned on the upper arm and the forearm to continuously record skin temperature and pressure under the garment.

Results: The main results were that at all time points, compared to placebo, FIR did not significantly affect brachial artery diameter and blood flow, CR-PWV, or total hemoglobin (condition × time interaction: p = 0.22, 0.54, 0.51, 0.96, respectively). Moreover, no significant condition × time × sensor position interaction effect was found in skin temperature (p = 0.99). However, pressure under garment was significantly higher under the FIR condition compared to placebo (+53%, p = 0.01, 95% confidence interval: FIR: 1.64-2.92 mmHg; placebo: 0.88-2.14 mmHg) while microvascular parameters were unchanged.

Conclusion: Contrary to our hypothesis, wearing an FIR arm garment at rest does not lead to an improvement of either macro or microvascular function. These results suggest limited benefits in the sports context, notably during recovery.

Background: Few individuals meet the 24-h movement guidelines for physical activity (PA), sedentary behavior, and sleep. Active outdoor play (AOP) may support healthier movement patterns, though its role is not yet established. The objective of this study was to synthesize evidence on associations between AOP and movement behaviors.

Methods: A systematic review and meta-analyses were conducted using five databases from inception to September 2025. Studies examining AOP and movement behaviors were included with no restriction on age, ability, or geographic location. Screening and data extraction were completed in duplicate. Narrative syntheses, random-effects meta-analyses, and The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation assessments were conducted.

Results: Of 28,092 records, 61 studies met inclusion criteria, spanning 25 countries with participants aged 1.6-15.5 years. Most were cross-sectional (n = 46), with some longitudinal (n = 8), quasi-experimental (n = 5), and randomized trials (n = 3). AOP was consistently associated with greater PA, especially moderate-to-vigorous PA; meta-analysis showed a moderate positive correlation with high heterogeneity (r = 0.60, 95% confidence interval (95%CI): 0.34-0.78, p = 0.0004; I² = 99.2%). AOP was also linked to less sedentary behavior: children were sedentary 38% of the time outdoors vs. 67% indoors. Meta-analyses showed a small, significant negative correlation with sedentary time (r = -0.05, 95%CI: -0.07 to -0.02, p < 0.0043; I² = 7.0%) and a small, non-significant correlation with screen time (r = -0.19, 95%CI: -0.38 to 0.02, p = 0.0638; I² = 98.9%). Evidence on sleep was mixed, with no adverse associations found. Certainty of evidence was low to very low.

Conclusion: AOP may support healthier movement behaviors in children and youth. More longitudinal and intervention research is needed to confirm causality and guide policy and practice.