Inter-Individual Variability in Astronaut Strength Response to Long-Duration Spaceflight May Be Dictated by In-Flight Exercise
BACKGROUND: Deconditioning induced by prolonged microgravity exposure during spaceflight hinders physical capacity. Examination of pre- to post-flight isokinetic strength measures shows that strength decreases; however, considerable variability between crewmembers exists. As in-flight exercise differs between crew, an examination of exercise training variables contributing to strength preservation is necessary. The purpose of this analysis was to examine in-flight exercise of astronauts who maintain strength compared to those with the greatest decrements in strength from pre- to post-flight. METHODS: The database of NASA International Space Station (ISS) crew who completed pre- and post-flight knee isokinetic testing (n = 87) was used to identify “responders” (R) and “non-responders” (NR) to in-flight exercise (≥ 90-day flight duration). R were those that maintained or improved strength (mean of knee extension and flexion at 60°/sec) (n = 14; 5.6 ± 7.8%), and NR were those with the most severe decrements (n = 14; -32.8 ± 4.1%) from pre- to post-flight. In-flight daily exercise records (cycle ergometer, treadmill, resistance exercise) were aggregated on a weekly basis. Independent t-tests or Mann-Whitney U tests were used to compare groups for in-flight exercise variables (i.e., frequency, time, intensity, volume). RESULTS: In-flight cycle ergometer frequency (2.4 ± 0.8 vs. 3.3 ± 1.0 days/wk; p = 0.021), total time (78.5 ± 20.4 vs. 114.0 ± 49.3 min/wk; p = 0.021), and active time (59.3 ± 17.2 vs. 86.9 ± 44.1 min/wk; p = 0.050) were greater in NR than R, but no differences for cycle intensity were observed. Treadmill distance traveled per session was greater in R than NR (4.6 ± 0.8 vs 3.6 ± 1.3 km/sess, p = 0.031), but no differences for treadmill frequency, total time, or active time were observed. Lower body resistance exercise intensity relative to pre-flight body weight was greater in R than NR (110.0 ± 16.5 vs 88.7 ± 25.0%; p = 0.012), but no differences in upper body or core resistance exercise intensity, volume, or frequency existed. CONCLUSIONS: The unique musculoskeletal loading provided by treadmill running at the expense of cycle ergometry, combined with using higher relative lower body loads during resistance training, may contribute to preserving strength in ISS crewmembers during long-duration spaceflight.