Effect of Masticatory Movement Using Gum on Walking and Cycling: A Randomized Crossover Design

PURPOSE: Gum chewing stimulates the sympathetic nervous system and increases energy consumption. However, the effect of mastication on physical activity remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the effect of gum masticatory movement on physiological markers related to walking and muscle acti...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Exercise science (Seoul, Korea) 2021, 30(3), , pp.361-368
Hauptverfasser: Lim, Byung-Gul, Kim, Hyunji, Bae, Jun-Hyun, Seo, Ji-Won, Kwak, Seong-Eun, Shin, Chae-Young, Ahn, Jooeun, Song, Wook
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:PURPOSE: Gum chewing stimulates the sympathetic nervous system and increases energy consumption. However, the effect of mastication on physical activity remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the effect of gum masticatory movement on physiological markers related to walking and muscle activation during cycling in different patient groups.METHODS: Using a randomized crossover design, 25 participants participated in walking trials with a 1-week washout; the trials included chewing gum (GUM), taking a candy with the same ingredients as the gum (CAN), and no ingestion (CON). Energy expenditure (EE), metabolic equivalent (MET), oxygen consumption (VO2), and heart rate were measured using a portable metabolic device. The walking distance was also calculated. In the cycling experiment, the other 19 participants randomly completed 7 minutes of the three trials (GUM, CAN, CON) with a 15-minute break. The mean cycling period (MCP), cycle number (CN), coefficient of variation of the cycling period (CV), and integrated electromyography (iEMG) results were measured using the Delsys Trigno™ Wireless EMG System.RESULTS: The walking distance was significantly higher in the GUM group than in the CAN and CON groups by an average of 78 m (7.4%, p
ISSN:1226-1726
2384-0544
DOI:10.15857/ksep.2021.30.3.361