Technical University of Munich, Faculty of Sports Science, Munich, Germany.
Int J Sports Med. 2010 Feb;31(2):89-94. doi: 10.1055/s-0029-1233466. Epub 2009 Dec 17.
The purpose of this study was to compare Anaerobic Work Capacity (AWC) measured on an isoinertial or an isokinetic bicycle ergometer. Twelve male participants completed two randomly ordered exercise testing sessions including a torque-velocity test followed by a 30-s all-out test on an isokinetic ergometer, or a force-velocity test followed by a Wingate Anaerobic Test on an isoinertial ergometer. Optimal load measured during the force-velocity test on the isoinertial ergometer was 1.13+/-0.11 N.kg(-1). Optimal cadence measured during the torque-velocity test on the isokinetic ergometer was 107+/-13 rpm. Although P(peak) measures were significantly correlated (r=0.77), we found a large difference between them (effect size=2.85) together with wide limits of agreement (bias+/-95%LOA=24+/-12%). The same observation was made with P(mean), but with a smaller magnitude of difference (bias+/-95%LOA=4.2+/-12%; effect size=0.51; r=0.73). This lack of agreement led us to the conclusion that AWC measures obtained during 30-s all-out tests performed on an isoinertial or an isokinetic bicycle ergometer are not necessarily similar and cannot be used interchangeably.
本研究旨在比较在等速和等动自行车测力计上测量的无氧工作能力(AWC)。12 名男性参与者完成了两次随机顺序的运动测试,包括在等动测力计上进行的扭矩-速度测试和 30 秒全力测试,或在等速测力计上进行的力-速度测试和随后的瓦格纳无氧测试。在等动力测力计上进行的力-速度测试中测量的最佳负荷为 1.13+/-0.11 N.kg(-1)。在等速测力计上进行的扭矩-速度测试中测量的最佳转速为 107+/-13 rpm。尽管 P(峰值)测量值显著相关(r=0.77),但我们发现它们之间存在很大差异(效应大小=2.85),同时存在较大的一致性界限(偏倚+/-95%LOA=24+/-12%)。对于 P(平均)也观察到了同样的情况,但差异幅度较小(偏倚+/-95%LOA=4.2+/-12%;效应大小=0.51;r=0.73)。这种不一致性使我们得出结论,在等动或等速自行车测力计上进行的 30 秒全力测试中获得的 AWC 测量值不一定相似,不能互换使用。