Skip to main content
Clinical Trials/NCT00876135
NCT00876135CompletedNot Applicable

Role of Airway Hyperresponsiveness on Performance in Elite Swimmers: Efficiency of a Bronchodilator to Prevent an Exercise-induced Bronchoconstriction

Laval University1 site in 1 country57 target enrollmentStarted: December 2008Last updated:
Conditions
Interventions
Drugs

Trial Snapshot

Phase
Not Applicable
Status
Completed
Enrollment
57
Locations
1
Primary Endpoint
Bronchodilator versus placebo effects on performance

Study Overview

Brief Summary

The prevalence of airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) is very high in elite swimmers, reaching 80% in certain studies. Repeated Chlorine-derivatives exposure may be a major causative factor for its development. Asthma diagnosis is generally made on the basis of clinical characteristics. The demonstration of a variable bronchial obstruction through positive expiratory flow reversibility to a bronchodilator, spontaneous variations of airway obstruction or a positive provocation test (methacholine, eucapnic voluntary hyperpnoea...) is necessary to avoid false diagnosis. Currently asthma treatment in swimmers is the same as in the general population. A short-acting bronchodilator is often prescribed to avoid occasional symptoms, combined with an inhaled corticosteroid or an antagonist of Leukotriene if asthma symptoms are persistent. Previous studies have shown a reduced efficiency for asthma medication in elite athletes compared with non-athletes. The specific response to different medications remains to be studied in athletes. The effects of a short-acting bronchodilator in swimmers with AHR, especially when asymptomatic, on pulmonary function and performance have not yet been studied. Moreover, the significance of a positive bronchial provocation test remains to be studied in asymptomatic swimmers with AHR.

Detailed Description

Our hypothesis is that swimmers with a positive bronchial provocation challenge have not necessarily an exercise-induced bronchoconstriction during swimming and the use of a bronchodilator will be unnecessary. Chlorine-derivatives exposure may be responsible for a weakness of the epithelium layer but warm and humid atmosphere of the swimming-pools may be protective for the development of a bronchoconstriction. Thus we also hypothesis that during a field test outside the swimming pool, swimmers will develop an exercise-induced asthma, and will need to take a bronchodilator in prevention.

Study Design

Study Type
Interventional
Allocation
Na
Intervention Model
Single Group
Primary Purpose
Diagnostic
Masking
Triple (Participant, Care Provider, Investigator)

Eligibility Criteria

Ages
14 Years to — (Child, Adult, Older Adult)
Sex
All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No

Inclusion Criteria

  • Swimmer (at least 10h/week) aged from at least 14 years.

Exclusion Criteria

  • Smoker, obese or other disease which may interfere with the study. Some parts of the study may exclude swimmers taking inhaled corticosteroids.

Arms & Interventions

Inhaled Bronchodilator

Placebo Comparator

Intervention: Ventolin (Drug)

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Bronchodilator versus placebo effects on performance

Time Frame: march to may 2009/ 8 visits

Secondary Outcomes

  • Measurement of oxidative stress(april to June 2009/ 3 visits)

Investigators

Sponsor Class
Other
Responsible Party
Principal Investigator
Principal Investigator

Louis-Philippe Boulet

MD

Laval University

Study Sites (1)

Loading locations...

Similar Trials