Sport Research, 7004HH, Doetinchem, The Netherlands.
University of Exeter, Sport and Health Sciences, Exeter, EX12LU, UK.
Eur J Appl Physiol. 2022 Mar;122(3):757-768. doi: 10.1007/s00421-021-04880-5. Epub 2022 Jan 6.
Peak power output ([Formula: see text]peak) in an incremental exercise test (EXT) is considered an important predictor of performance for cyclists. However, [Formula: see text]peak is protocol dependent. The purpose of this study was to model the effect of EXT design on [Formula: see text]peak.
An adapted version of a previously developed mathematical model was used. For the purpose of validity testing, we compared predicted [Formula: see text]peak differences (predicted Δ[Formula: see text]peak) with actual Δ[Formula: see text]peak found in sports science literature.
The model quantified Δ[Formula: see text]peak between 36 EXT designs with stage durations in the range 1-5 min and increments in the range 10-50 W. Predicted Δ[Formula: see text]peak and actual Δ[Formula: see text]peak across a wide range of performance levels of cyclists were in good agreement. Depending on the specific combination of increment and stage duration, [Formula: see text]peak may be widely different or equivalent. A minimum difference in increment (5 W) or in stage duration (1 min) already results in significantly different [Formula: see text]peak. In EXTs having the same ratio between increment and stage duration, [Formula: see text]peak in the EXT with the shortest stage duration or the greatest increment is significantly higher. Tests combining 15 W, 25 W or 40 W increments with 2, 3 and 4 min stage durations, respectively, are 'special' in that their [Formula: see text]peak approximates the power output associated with maximal oxygen uptake ([Formula: see text]).
The modeling results allow comparison of [Formula: see text]peak between widely different EXT designs. Absolute performance level does not affect Δ[Formula: see text]peak. [Formula: see text]peak15/2, [Formula: see text]peak25/3 and [Formula: see text]peak40/4 constitute a practical physiologic reference for performance diagnostics and exercise intensity prescription.
递增运动测试（EXT）中的最大功率输出（[Formula: see text]peak）被认为是自行车运动员表现的重要预测指标。然而，[Formula: see text]peak 取决于测试方案。本研究的目的是建立模型来研究 EXT 设计对[Formula: see text]peak 的影响。
使用了先前开发的数学模型的改编版本。为了验证有效性，我们将预测的[Formula: see text]peak 差异（预测的 Δ[Formula: see text]peak）与体育科学文献中发现的实际 Δ[Formula: see text]peak 进行了比较。
该模型量化了 36 种 EXT 设计之间的 Δ[Formula: see text]peak，这些设计的阶段持续时间范围为 1-5 分钟，增量范围为 10-50W。预测的 Δ[Formula: see text]peak 和 across across 不同自行车运动员表现水平的实际 Δ[Formula: see text]peak 非常吻合。根据增量和阶段持续时间的具体组合，[Formula: see text]peak 可能会有很大差异或等效。增量（5W）或阶段持续时间（1 分钟）的最小差异已经导致[Formula: see text]peak 显著不同。在增量和阶段持续时间之间具有相同比例的 EXT 中，阶段持续时间最短或增量最大的 EXT 的[Formula: see text]peak 显著更高。分别结合 15W、25W 或 40W 增量以及 2、3 和 4 分钟阶段持续时间的测试是“特殊”的，因为它们的[Formula: see text]peak 近似于与最大摄氧量相关的功率输出（[Formula: see text]）。
建模结果允许在广泛不同的 EXT 设计之间比较[Formula: see text]peak。绝对表现水平不会影响 Δ[Formula: see text]peak。[Formula: see text]peak15/2、[Formula: see text]peak25/3 和[Formula: see text]peak40/4 构成了用于性能诊断和运动强度处方的实用生理参考。
