Evidence Hub

Peripheral vasoconstriction is not elevated during hyperreactive responses to the cold pressor test: a cross-sectional study

Jon Stavres, A. Vallecillo-Bustos, Sarah Parnell, Ryan S. Aultman, Ta’Quoris A. Newsome, Sydney H. Swafford, Abby T. Compton, Rhett C. Schimpf et al.

Frontiers in Physiology, 2025

34 participants

Abstract

Background Individuals demonstrating increases in systolic systolic blood pressure or diastolic diastolic blood pressure blood pressure of at least 15 mmHg are considered hyperreactors to the cold pressor test (CPT). However, it remains unclear if peripheral vasoconstriction is similarly exaggerated during the CPT in these individuals. Methods Fifty-five individuals (54.5% non-White, 67.3% female) performed a single-visit study including a 2-min CPT of the foot, a 2-min bout of rhythmic handgrip exercise ([HG] 25% maximal voluntary contraction), and a 2-min combined trial (CPT + HG). Beat-by-beat heart rate (HR), blood pressure, and forearm blood flow (FBF) were continuously recorded, and vascular conductance (FVC) was calculated as FBF/mean arterial pressure (MAP). Results Hyperreactors (n = 21) demonstrated exaggerated increases in blood pressure and rate pressure product during the CPT compared to normoreactors (n = 34; all p < 0.001), while no significant differences were observed for ΔFBF (f = 1.33, p = 0.259) or ΔFVC responses (f = 2.10, p = 0.083). Results also indicated a blunted increase in ΔMAP during the CPT + HG trial compared to the CPT only trial in hyperreactors (f = 6.95, p < 0.001), which was not observed in normoreactors (f = 0.982, p = 0.420), and a blunted ΔFVC response during the CPT + HG trial in hyperreactors compared to normoreactors (f = 2.57, p = 0.039). When analyzed separately, the blood pressure responses to HG exercise were also significantly…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cross-sectional. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause. Reported size: 34 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free