Arad Avigdor D, Bishop Kaitlyn, Adimoolam Deena, Albu Jeanine B, DiMenna Fred J
Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Bone, Department of Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, United States of America.
Department of Biobehavioral Sciences, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2020 Jul 6;15(7):e0235567. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0235567. eCollection 2020.
In the absence of a ⩒o2-work-rate plateau, debate continues regarding the best way to verify that the peak ⩒o2 achieved during incremental exercise (⩒o2peak) is the "true ⩒o2max." Oft-used "secondary criteria" have been questioned in conjunction with the contention that a severe-intensity constant-work-rate "verification bout" should be considered the "gold standard." The purpose of this study was to compare the ⩒o2peak during ramp incremental cycling (RAMP-INC) by a heterogeneous (with respect to body composition and sex) cohort of sedentary individuals with the ⩒o2peak during severe-intensity constant-work-rate cycling (CWR) performed after RAMP-INC at the highest work rate achieved. A secondary purpose was to determine the degree to which traditional and newly-proposed age-dependent secondary criteria (RER, HR) identified RAMP-INC which CWR confirmed were characterized by a submaximal ⩒o2peak. Thirty-five healthy male (n = 19: 33.4 ± 6.3 yrs) and female (26.8 ± 3.6 yrs) sedentary participants performed RAMP-INC followed by CWR. The ⩒o2peak values from the two tests were correlated (r = 0.96; p < 0.01; mean CV = 24%); however, ⩒o2peak for CWR was significantly greater (29.6 ± 7.2 v. 28.6 ± 6.8 mL∙min-1∙kg-1; p < 0.01) with a mean bias of 0.98 mL∙min-1∙kg-1 (z = -2.9, p < 0.01). Both traditional and newly-proposed criterion values for RER were achieved during RAMP-INC by 33 of 35 participants (including 21 of 23 who registered a higher ⩒o2peak on CWR). The traditional HR criterion value was achieved on only seven tests (three of which were confirmed to be characterized by a submaximal ⩒o2peak) while use of less stringent newly-proposed criteria resulted in acceptance of an additional seven tests of which five were confirmed to be submaximal. Severe-intensity CWR to limit of tolerance indicates that RAMP-INC underestimates ⩒o2max in sedentary individuals and both traditional and newly-proposed secondary criteria are ineffective for identifying such tests.
在不存在氧摄取量-工作负荷平台期的情况下，关于如何最佳地验证递增运动期间达到的峰值氧摄取量（VO₂peak）是否为“真正的最大摄氧量（VO₂max）”的争论仍在继续。常用的“次要标准”受到了质疑，同时有人认为高强度恒定工作负荷的“验证试验”应被视为“金标准”。本研究的目的是比较一组久坐不动的异质人群（在身体组成和性别方面）进行斜坡递增骑行（RAMP-INC）时的VO₂peak与在RAMP-INC后以达到的最高工作负荷进行高强度恒定工作负荷骑行（CWR）时的VO₂peak。第二个目的是确定传统的和新提出的年龄相关次要标准（呼吸交换率、心率）在识别CWR确认的以次最大VO₂peak为特征的RAMP-INC方面的程度。35名健康的久坐男性（n = 19：33.4±6.3岁）和女性（26.8±3.6岁）参与者先进行RAMP-INC，然后进行CWR。两次测试的VO₂peak值具有相关性（r = 0.96；p < 0.01；平均变异系数 = 24%）；然而，CWR的VO₂peak显著更高（29.6±7.2对28.6±6.8 mL∙min⁻¹∙kg⁻¹；p < 0.01），平均偏差为0.98 mL∙min⁻¹∙kg⁻¹（z = -2.9，p < 0.01）。35名参与者中有33人在RAMP-INC期间达到了传统的和新提出的呼吸交换率标准值（包括在CWR上记录到更高VO₂peak的23人中的21人）。传统的心率标准值仅在7次测试中达到（其中3次被确认为以次最大VO₂peak为特征），而使用不太严格的新提出的标准又额外接受了7次测试，其中5次被确认为次最大。达到耐受极限的高强度CWR表明，RAMP-INC低估了久坐个体的VO₂max，并且传统的和新提出的次要标准在识别此类测试方面均无效。
