Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
The Validity and Reliability of a Tire Pressure-Based Power Meter for Indoor Cycling.
Fiolo, Nicholas J; Lu, Hai-Ying; Chen, Chia-Hsiang; Fuchs, Philip X; Chen, Wei-Han; Shiang, Tzyy-Yuang.
Afiliação
  • Fiolo NJ; Department of Athletic Performance, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei 106, Taiwan.
  • Lu HY; Department of Athletic Performance, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei 106, Taiwan.
  • Chen CH; Office of Physical Education, National Pingtung University of Science and Technology, Pingtung 912, Taiwan.
  • Fuchs PX; Department of Athletic Performance, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei 106, Taiwan.
  • Chen WH; Department of Athletic Performance, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei 106, Taiwan.
  • Shiang TY; Department of Athletic Performance, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei 106, Taiwan.
Sensors (Basel) ; 21(18)2021 Sep 12.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34577323
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the validity and reliability of a tire pressure sensor (TPS) cycling power meter against a gold standard (SRM) during indoor cycling. Twelve recreationally active participants completed eight trials of 90 s of cycling at different pedaling and gearing combinations on an indoor hybrid roller. Power output (PO) was simultaneously calculated via TPS and SRM. The analysis compared the paired 1 s PO and 1 min average PO per trial between devices. Agreement was assessed by correlation, linear regression, inferential statistics, effect size, and Bland-Altman LoA. Reliability was assessed by ICC and CV comparison. TPS showed near-perfect correlation with SRM in 1 s (rs = 0.97, p < 0.001) and 1-min data (rs = 0.99, p < 0.001). Differences in paired 1 s data were statistically significant (p = 0.04), but of a trivial magnitude (d = 0.05). There was no significant main effect for device (F(1,9) = 0.05, p = 0.83, ηp2 = 0.97) in 1 min data and no statistical differences between devices by trial in post hoc analysis (p < 0.01-0.98; d < 0.01-0.93). Bias and LoA were -0.21 ± 16.77 W for the 1 min data. Mean TPS bias ranged from 3.37% to 7.81% of the measured SRM mean PO per trial. Linear regression SEE was 7.55 W for 1 min TPS prediction of SRM. ICC3,1 across trials was 0.96. No statistical difference (p = 0.09-0.11) in TPS CV (3.6-5.0%) and SRM CV (4.3-4.7%). The TPS is a valid and reliable power meter for estimating average indoor PO for time periods equal to or greater than 1 min and may have acceptable sensitivity to detect changes under less stringent criteria (±5%).
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Ciclismo / Teste de Esforço Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Ciclismo / Teste de Esforço Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article