Cargando…

Assessment of peak oxygen uptake during handcycling: Test-retest reliability and comparison of a ramp-incremented and perceptually-regulated exercise test

PURPOSE: To examine the reliability of a perceptually-regulated maximal exercise test (PRET(max)) to measure peak oxygen uptake ([Image: see text] ) during handcycle exercise and to compare peak responses to those derived from a ramp-incremented protocol (RAMP). METHODS: Twenty recreationally active...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hutchinson, Michael J., Paulson, Thomas A. W., Eston, Roger, Goosey-Tolfrey, Victoria L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5509239/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28704487
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0181008
_version_ 1783249988600463360
author Hutchinson, Michael J.
Paulson, Thomas A. W.
Eston, Roger
Goosey-Tolfrey, Victoria L.
author_facet Hutchinson, Michael J.
Paulson, Thomas A. W.
Eston, Roger
Goosey-Tolfrey, Victoria L.
author_sort Hutchinson, Michael J.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To examine the reliability of a perceptually-regulated maximal exercise test (PRET(max)) to measure peak oxygen uptake ([Image: 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 PRET(max) in week 2, or vice versa. The PRET(max) 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 [Image: 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 PRET(max) and RAMP, respectively. Measurement error was 0.15 L·min(-1) and 2.11 ml·kg(-1)·min(-1) in PRET(max) and 0.16 L·min(-1) and 2.29 ml·kg(-1)·min(-1) during RAMP for determining absolute and relative [Image: see text] , respectively. The difference in [Image: see text] between PRET(max) 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 PRET(max) can be used as a reliable test to measure [Image: see text] during handcycle exercise in recreationally active participants. Whilst PRET(max) tended towards significantly greater [Image: see text] values than RAMP, the difference is smaller than measurement error of determining [Image: see text] from PRET(max) and RAMP.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5509239
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55092392017-08-07 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. PLoS One Research Article PURPOSE: To examine the reliability of a perceptually-regulated maximal exercise test (PRET(max)) to measure peak oxygen uptake ([Image: 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 PRET(max) in week 2, or vice versa. The PRET(max) 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 [Image: 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 PRET(max) and RAMP, respectively. Measurement error was 0.15 L·min(-1) and 2.11 ml·kg(-1)·min(-1) in PRET(max) and 0.16 L·min(-1) and 2.29 ml·kg(-1)·min(-1) during RAMP for determining absolute and relative [Image: see text] , respectively. The difference in [Image: see text] between PRET(max) 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 PRET(max) can be used as a reliable test to measure [Image: see text] during handcycle exercise in recreationally active participants. Whilst PRET(max) tended towards significantly greater [Image: see text] values than RAMP, the difference is smaller than measurement error of determining [Image: see text] from PRET(max) and RAMP. Public Library of Science 2017-07-13 /pmc/articles/PMC5509239/ /pubmed/28704487 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0181008 Text en © 2017 Hutchinson et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Hutchinson, Michael J.
Paulson, Thomas A. W.
Eston, Roger
Goosey-Tolfrey, Victoria L.
Assessment of peak oxygen uptake during handcycling: Test-retest reliability and comparison of a ramp-incremented and perceptually-regulated exercise test
title Assessment of peak oxygen uptake during handcycling: Test-retest reliability and comparison of a ramp-incremented and perceptually-regulated exercise test
title_full Assessment of peak oxygen uptake during handcycling: Test-retest reliability and comparison of a ramp-incremented and perceptually-regulated exercise test
title_fullStr Assessment of peak oxygen uptake during handcycling: Test-retest reliability and comparison of a ramp-incremented and perceptually-regulated exercise test
title_full_unstemmed Assessment of peak oxygen uptake during handcycling: Test-retest reliability and comparison of a ramp-incremented and perceptually-regulated exercise test
title_short Assessment of peak oxygen uptake during handcycling: Test-retest reliability and comparison of a ramp-incremented and perceptually-regulated exercise test
title_sort assessment of peak oxygen uptake during handcycling: test-retest reliability and comparison of a ramp-incremented and perceptually-regulated exercise test
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5509239/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28704487
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0181008
work_keys_str_mv AT hutchinsonmichaelj assessmentofpeakoxygenuptakeduringhandcyclingtestretestreliabilityandcomparisonofarampincrementedandperceptuallyregulatedexercisetest
AT paulsonthomasaw assessmentofpeakoxygenuptakeduringhandcyclingtestretestreliabilityandcomparisonofarampincrementedandperceptuallyregulatedexercisetest
AT estonroger assessmentofpeakoxygenuptakeduringhandcyclingtestretestreliabilityandcomparisonofarampincrementedandperceptuallyregulatedexercisetest
AT gooseytolfreyvictorial assessmentofpeakoxygenuptakeduringhandcyclingtestretestreliabilityandcomparisonofarampincrementedandperceptuallyregulatedexercisetest