Suppr超能文献

手摇车运动中峰值摄氧量的评估:重测信度以及递增负荷运动试验与主观调控运动试验的比较

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

作者信息

Hutchinson Michael J, Paulson Thomas A W, Eston Roger, Goosey-Tolfrey Victoria L

机构信息

The Peter Harrison Centre for Disability Sport, School for Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom.

Alliance for Research in Exercise, Nutrition and Activity, Sansom Institute for Health Research, School of Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2017 Jul 13;12(7):e0181008. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0181008. eCollection 2017.

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.

摘要

目的

检验感知调节的最大运动测试(PRETmax)在手摇车运动中测量峰值摄氧量([公式:见原文])的可靠性,并将峰值反应与递增式方案(RAMP)得出的结果进行比较。

方法

20名有休闲运动习惯的个体(14名男性,6名女性)在2周内采用随机、交叉设计完成4次试验。参与者在第1周完成2次RAMP方案(20 W·min-1),第2周完成2次PRETmax,或反之。PRETmax包括五个2分钟阶段,将主观用力程度分级(RPE)固定在11、13、15、17和20级。参与者根据需要频繁改变功率输出(PO)以维持目标RPE。在整个过程中收集气体交换变量(摄氧量、二氧化碳产生量、分钟通气量)、心率(HR)和PO。在每次试验的每个阶段结束时收集分级RPE。

结果

对于相对[公式:见原文],变异系数(CV)分别为4.1%和4.8%,PRETmax和RAMP重复测量的组内相关系数(ICC(3,1))分别为0.92和0.85。在PRETmax中,测定绝对和相对[公式:见原文]时的测量误差分别为0.15 L·min-1和2.11 ml·kg-1·min-1,在RAMP中分别为0.16 L·min-1和2.29 ml·kg-1·min-1。PRETmax和RAMP之间的[公式:见原文]差异有统计学意义的趋势(26.2±5.1对24.3±4.0 ml·kg-1·min-1,P = 0.055)。95%的一致性界限为-1.9±4.1(-9.9至6.2)ml·kg-1·min-1。

结论

PRETmax可作为一种可靠的测试,用于测量有休闲运动习惯的参与者在手摇车运动中的[公式:见原文]。虽然PRETmax得出的[公式:见原文]值往往比RAMP显著更高,但差异小于从PRETmax和RAMP测定[公式:见原文]的测量误差。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/322d/5509239/50f97b765de9/pone.0181008.g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验