Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Assessment of peak oxygen uptake during handcycling: Test-retest reliability and comparison of a ramp-incremented and perceptually-regulated exercise test.
Hutchinson, Michael J; Paulson, Thomas A W; Eston, Roger; Goosey-Tolfrey, Victoria L.
Afiliação
  • Hutchinson MJ; The Peter Harrison Centre for Disability Sport, School for Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom.
  • Paulson TAW; The Peter Harrison Centre for Disability Sport, School for Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom.
  • Eston R; Alliance for Research in Exercise, Nutrition and Activity, Sansom Institute for Health Research, School of Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.
  • Goosey-Tolfrey VL; The Peter Harrison Centre for Disability Sport, School for Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom.
PLoS One ; 12(7): e0181008, 2017.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28704487
ABSTRACT

PURPOSE:

To examine the reliability of a perceptually-regulated maximal exercise test (PRETmax) to measure peak oxygen uptake ([Formula see text]) during handcycle exercise and to compare peak responses to those derived from a ramp-incremented protocol (RAMP).

METHODS:

Twenty recreationally active individuals (14 male, 6 female) completed four trials across a 2-week period, using a randomised, counterbalanced design. Participants completed two RAMP protocols (20 W·min-1) in week 1, followed by two PRETmax in week 2, or vice versa. The PRETmax comprised five, 2-min stages clamped at Ratings of Perceived Exertion (RPE) 11, 13, 15, 17 and 20. Participants changed power output (PO) as often as required to maintain target RPE. Gas exchange variables (oxygen uptake, carbon dioxide production, minute ventilation), heart rate (HR) and PO were collected throughout. Differentiated RPE were collected at the end of each stage throughout trials.

RESULTS:

For relative [Formula see text], coefficient of variation (CV) was equal to 4.1% and 4.8%, with ICC(3,1) of 0.92 and 0.85 for repeated measures from PRETmax and RAMP, respectively. Measurement error was 0.15 L·min-1 and 2.11 ml·kg-1·min-1 in PRETmax and 0.16 L·min-1 and 2.29 ml·kg-1·min-1 during RAMP for determining absolute and relative [Formula see text], respectively. The difference in [Formula see text] between PRETmax and RAMP was tending towards statistical significance (26.2 ± 5.1 versus 24.3 ± 4.0 ml·kg-1·min-1, P = 0.055). The 95% LoA were -1.9 ± 4.1 (-9.9 to 6.2) ml·kg-1·min-1.

CONCLUSION:

The PRETmax can be used as a reliable test to measure [Formula see text] during handcycle exercise in recreationally active participants. Whilst PRETmax tended towards significantly greater [Formula see text] values than RAMP, the difference is smaller than measurement error of determining [Formula see text] from PRETmax and RAMP.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Oxigênio / Teste de Esforço Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials Limite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2017 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Oxigênio / Teste de Esforço Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials Limite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2017 Tipo de documento: Article