Cargando…
Run Economy on a Normal and Lower Body Positive Pressure Treadmill
Lower body positive pressure (LBPP) treadmill running is used more frequently in clinical and athletic settings. Accurate caloric expenditure is required for proper exercise prescription, especially for obese patients performing LBPP exercise. It is unclear if running on LBPP changes running economy...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Berkeley Electronic Press
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5609665/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28966714 |
_version_ | 1783265654109896704 |
---|---|
author | TEMPLE, COREY LIND, ERIK VAN LANGEN, DEBORAH TRUE, LARISSA HUPMAN, SAIGE HOKANSON, JAMES F. |
author_facet | TEMPLE, COREY LIND, ERIK VAN LANGEN, DEBORAH TRUE, LARISSA HUPMAN, SAIGE HOKANSON, JAMES F. |
author_sort | TEMPLE, COREY |
collection | PubMed |
description | Lower body positive pressure (LBPP) treadmill running is used more frequently in clinical and athletic settings. Accurate caloric expenditure is required for proper exercise prescription, especially for obese patients performing LBPP exercise. It is unclear if running on LBPP changes running economy (RE) in proportion to the changes in body weight. The purpose of the study was to measure the oxygen consumption (VO(2)) and running economy (RE) of treadmill running at normal body weight and on LBPP. Twenty-three active, non-obese participants (25.8±7.2 years; BMI = 25.52±3.29 kg·m(−2)) completed two bouts of running exercise in a counterbalanced manner: (a) on a normal treadmill (NT) and (b) on a LBPP treadmill at 60% (40% of body weight supported) for 4 min at 2.24 (5 mph), 2.68 (6 mph), and 3.13 m·s(−1) (7 mph). Repeated measures ANOVA showed a statistically significant interaction in RE among trials, F(2, 44) = 6.510, p <.0005, partial η(2) = 0.228. An examination of pairwise comparisons indicated that RE was significantly greater for LBPP across the three speeds (p < 0.005). As expected, LBPP treadmill running resulted in significantly lower oxygen consumption at all three running speeds. We conclude that RE (ml O(2)·kg(−1)·km(−1)) of LBPP running is significantly poorer than normal treadmill running, and the ~30% change in absolute energy cost is not as great as predicted by the change in body weight (40%). |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5609665 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Berkeley Electronic Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-56096652017-09-27 Run Economy on a Normal and Lower Body Positive Pressure Treadmill TEMPLE, COREY LIND, ERIK VAN LANGEN, DEBORAH TRUE, LARISSA HUPMAN, SAIGE HOKANSON, JAMES F. Int J Exerc Sci Original Research Lower body positive pressure (LBPP) treadmill running is used more frequently in clinical and athletic settings. Accurate caloric expenditure is required for proper exercise prescription, especially for obese patients performing LBPP exercise. It is unclear if running on LBPP changes running economy (RE) in proportion to the changes in body weight. The purpose of the study was to measure the oxygen consumption (VO(2)) and running economy (RE) of treadmill running at normal body weight and on LBPP. Twenty-three active, non-obese participants (25.8±7.2 years; BMI = 25.52±3.29 kg·m(−2)) completed two bouts of running exercise in a counterbalanced manner: (a) on a normal treadmill (NT) and (b) on a LBPP treadmill at 60% (40% of body weight supported) for 4 min at 2.24 (5 mph), 2.68 (6 mph), and 3.13 m·s(−1) (7 mph). Repeated measures ANOVA showed a statistically significant interaction in RE among trials, F(2, 44) = 6.510, p <.0005, partial η(2) = 0.228. An examination of pairwise comparisons indicated that RE was significantly greater for LBPP across the three speeds (p < 0.005). As expected, LBPP treadmill running resulted in significantly lower oxygen consumption at all three running speeds. We conclude that RE (ml O(2)·kg(−1)·km(−1)) of LBPP running is significantly poorer than normal treadmill running, and the ~30% change in absolute energy cost is not as great as predicted by the change in body weight (40%). Berkeley Electronic Press 2017-09-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5609665/ /pubmed/28966714 Text en |
spellingShingle | Original Research TEMPLE, COREY LIND, ERIK VAN LANGEN, DEBORAH TRUE, LARISSA HUPMAN, SAIGE HOKANSON, JAMES F. Run Economy on a Normal and Lower Body Positive Pressure Treadmill |
title | Run Economy on a Normal and Lower Body Positive Pressure Treadmill |
title_full | Run Economy on a Normal and Lower Body Positive Pressure Treadmill |
title_fullStr | Run Economy on a Normal and Lower Body Positive Pressure Treadmill |
title_full_unstemmed | Run Economy on a Normal and Lower Body Positive Pressure Treadmill |
title_short | Run Economy on a Normal and Lower Body Positive Pressure Treadmill |
title_sort | run economy on a normal and lower body positive pressure treadmill |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5609665/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28966714 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT templecorey runeconomyonanormalandlowerbodypositivepressuretreadmill AT linderik runeconomyonanormalandlowerbodypositivepressuretreadmill AT vanlangendeborah runeconomyonanormalandlowerbodypositivepressuretreadmill AT truelarissa runeconomyonanormalandlowerbodypositivepressuretreadmill AT hupmansaige runeconomyonanormalandlowerbodypositivepressuretreadmill AT hokansonjamesf runeconomyonanormalandlowerbodypositivepressuretreadmill |