The biomechanics of cycling is a multifaceted discipline that integrates principles of human movement, muscle physiology, and energy transfer to optimize performance and prevent injury. At its core, cycling involves a cyclical alternation between the power phase—where the quadriceps, gluteal muscles, and gastrocnemius generate the majority of the propulsive force—and the recovery phase, during which the hamstrings and hip flexors facilitate the return of the leg to its initial position. Efficient energy transfer to the pedals is not only a function of lower limb muscle activation but also depends critically on core stabilization, which ensures biomechanical efficiency and minimizes compensatory movements that could predispose the cyclist to injury1,2,3.
Currently, researchers are focusing on the assessment of muscle activation patterns, fatigue, and thermoregulatory responses during cycling3,4,5. This interest is due to the recognition that muscle fatigue is a complex phenomenon, impairing performance and increasing injury risk, and that its early detection and management are essential for both elite and recreational cyclists2,6. Among the array of available assessment tools, infrared thermography (IRT) has been established as a promising, non-invasive technique for monitoring muscle activity and fatigue5. IRT enables the visualization of skin temperature changes, which may reflect underlying muscle activation and thermoregulatory processes during exercise that have a direct effect on athletes' metabolism5,7.
Despite its potential, the application of IRT in cycling biomechanics research and practice faces several methodological challenges. While some standard operating procedures (SOPs) have been proposed in general sports and clinical contexts8,9, there is a recognized need for further refinement of existing protocols to address the unique physiological and convective cooling demands of amateur cycling7,10. The variability in environmental conditions, inconsistencies in subject preparation, and the lack of consensus regarding the selection of anatomical regions of interest have limited the reproducibility and comparability of findings across studies1,5,7,9. These limitations underscore the need for rigorous methodological frameworks to harness the full potential of IRT in the context of cycling7,10,11,12.
The literature reveals that the main thematic axes in this field include exercise physiology, IRT, skin temperature monitoring, exercise performance, and thermoregulation2,5,7. Studies have demonstrated significant correlations between skin temperature and muscle activation parameters, such as those obtained via surface electromyography (sEMG), suggesting that IRT can serve as a surrogate marker for muscle fatigue during dynamic exercise5. However, external factors such as perspiration, ambient temperature, and individual differences in thermoregulatory capacity could influence thermographic results, necessitating careful control and reporting of experimental conditions7.
Likewise, advances in non-invasive muscle fatigue monitoring have expanded beyond IRT to include techniques such as sEMG, mechanomyography (MMG), near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS), and ultrasound imaging13,14,15,16,17. Each modality offers unique insights into muscle function: sEMG quantifies electrical activity during contraction, MMG captures mechanical vibrations, NIRS assesses muscle oxygenation, and ultrasound visualizes muscle deformation. The integration of IRT into this multi-modal landscape holds particular promise for cycling, where continuous, non-contact monitoring is advantageous. IRT can complement other modalities by providing spatially resolved, real-time data on skin temperature distribution, which may reflect localized muscle activation, asymmetries, and potential sites of overuse or injury14,18.
To overcome the methodological inconsistencies identified in previous research, the protocol proposed in this study is strictly aligned with international standards for clinical and sports thermography. Specifically, the parameters for subject preparation and environmental control—such as the restriction of stimulants and physical activity, and the use of standardized acclimatization periods—are based on the guidelines established by the International Academy of Clinical Thermology (IACT), the American Academy of Thermology (AAT), and the Glamorgan Protocol8. Furthermore, the environmental and technical settings, including emissivity and thermal strain assessment, follow the ISO 9886 standards and the recommendations of the European Association of Thermology (EAT). By integrating these established regulations, this study ensures that IRT measurements are a reliable reflection of physiological responses, providing a robust framework for monitoring muscle fatigue and biomechanics in recreational cyclists.
Nevertheless, the successful application of IRT in cycling biomechanics requires the establishment of standardized methodologies. This includes the definition of pre-exercise acclimatization periods, control of ambient temperature and humidity, consistent subject preparation, and the precise delineation of anatomical regions of interest for thermal analysis5,7. Furthermore, the development of robust data analysis protocols will enhance the interpretability and utility of IRT data5.
The present study addresses these gaps by proposing and validating a comprehensive methodological framework for the integration of IRT into biomechanical analysis in recreational cyclists. By systematically controlling for environmental and subject-related variables, and by correlating thermal data with established markers of muscle activation and fatigue, this approach aims to optimize the monitoring of muscle fatigue, contribute to injury prevention, and enhance performance outcomes2,5,7,14.