van de Kerkhof · Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) 2024 · systematic review and meta-analysis · n=563 participants across 59 studies

Performance Benefits of Pre- and Per-cooling on Self-paced Versus Constant Workload Exercise: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Cited 18 times in the scientific literature.

Level 1 - systematic review of randomized trials

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized crossover trials

PubMed 37803106 · doi:10.1007/s40279-023-01940-y · record verified 2026-08-29

What was done

A systematic review and meta-analysis (preregistered on OSF) evaluating the effects of pre-cooling and per-cooling on exercise performance in the heat (> 30 °C) across self-paced versus constant workload protocols. Searches across PubMed, Web of Science, and MEDLINE through June 2023 identified 59 randomized crossover studies comprising 86 experiments and 563 male athletes (832 paired measurements; 40 self-paced protocols [n = 370] and 19 constant workload protocols [n = 193]; 67 pre-cooling and 19 per-cooling experiments). Average ambient conditions were 34.0 °C and 50.0% relative humidity. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane tool.

What was found

Cooling attenuated heat-induced performance declines and showed larger effects during constant workload (effect size [ES] = 0.62, 95% CI 0.44–0.81) than self-paced exercise (ES = 0.30, 95% CI 0.18–0.42; p = 0.004). This difference was driven by pre-cooling, which was substantially more effective during constant workload versus self-paced exercise (ES = 0.74, 95% CI 0.50–0.98 vs ES = 0.29, 95% CI 0.17–0.42; p = 0.001). Conversely, per-cooling showed similar effects across both protocols (constant workload ES = 0.45, 95% CI 0.16–0.74 vs self-paced ES = 0.35, 95% CI 0.01–0.70; p = 0.68).

Why it matters

Pre-cooling studies using open-loop time-to-exhaustion protocols substantially overestimate performance benefits compared with ecologically valid self-paced trials, whereas cooling during exercise provides consistent moderate benefits regardless of pacing protocol.

Limits

The review included only male participants, limiting generalizability to female athletes. There was an imbalance between pre-cooling (67 experiments) and per-cooling (19 experiments), and the abstract does not report separate analyses for specific cooling modalities.

Cited by