Dataset Information

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

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.

SUBMITTER: Hutchinson MJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5509239 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

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

Hutchinson Michael J MJ Paulson Thomas A W TAW Eston Roger R Goosey-Tolfrey Victoria L VL

PloS one 20170713 7

<h4>Purpose</h4>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).<h4>Methods</h4>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, ...[more]

PMID: 28704487

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objective: To compare peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak) and the test-retest reliability of physiological parameters between a 1-min and a 3-min closed-end and an incremental open-end upper-body poling test. Methods: On two separate test days, 24 healthy, upper-body trained men (age: 28.3 ± 9.3 years, body mass: 77.4 ± 8.9 kg, height: 182 ± 7 cm) performed a 1-min, a 3-min and an incremental test to volitional exhaustion in the same random order. Respiratory parameters, heart rate (HR), blood lactate concentration (BLa), rating of perceived exertion (RPE), and power output were measured. VO2peak was determined as the single highest 30-s average. Relative reliability was assessed with the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC2, 1) and absolute reliability with the standard error of measurement (SEM) and smallest detectable change (SDC). Results: The incremental (3.50 ± 0.46 L·min-1 and 45.4 ± 5.5 mL·kg-1·min-1) and the 3-min test (3.42 ± 0.47 L·min-1 and 44.5 ± 5.5 mL·kg-1·min-1) resulted in significantly higher absolute and body-mass normalized VO2peak compared to the 1-min test (3.13 ± 0.40 L·min-1 and 40.4 ± 5.0 mL·kg-1·min-1) (all comparisons, p < 0.001). Furthermore, the incremental test resulted in a significantly higher VO2peak as compared to the 3-min test (p < 0.001). VO2peak was significantly higher on day 1 than day 2 for the 1-min test (p < 0.05) and displayed a trend toward higher values on day 2 for the incremental test (p = 0.07). High and very high ICCs across all physiological parameters were found for the 1-min (0.827-0.956), the 3-min (0.916-0.949), and the incremental test (0.728-0.956). The SDC was consistently small for HR (1-min: 4%, 3-min: 4%, incremental: 3%), moderate for absolute and body-mass normalized VO2peak (1-min: 5%, 3-min: 6%, incremental: 7%) and large for BLa (1-min: 20%, 3-min: 12%, incremental: 22%). Conclusions: Whereas both the 3-min and the incremental test display high relative reliability, the incremental test induces slightly higher VO2peak. However, the 3-min test seems to be more stable with respect to day-to-day differences in VO2peak. The 1-min test would provide a reliable alternative when short test-duration is desirable, but is not recommended for testing VO2peak due to the clearly lower values.

Project description:BackgroundLong-distance runners are prone to injuries including Achilles tendinopathy and medial tibial stress syndrome. We have developed an Internet comprehensive self-report questionnaire examining the medical history, injury history, and running habits of adult recreational runners.ObjectiveThe objective of the study was to evaluate two alternative forms of test-retest reliability of a comprehensive self-report Internet questionnaire retrospectively examining the medical history, injury history, and running habits among a sample of adult recreational runners. This will contribute to the broad aims of a wider study investigating genetics and running injury.MethodsInvitations to complete an Internet questionnaire were sent by email to a convenience pilot population (test group 1). Inclusion criteria required participants to be a recreational runner age 18 or over, who ran over 15 km per week on a consistent basis. The survey questions addressed regular running habits and any injuries (including signs, symptoms, and diagnosis) of the lower limbs that resulted in discontinuation of running for a period of 2 consecutive weeks or more, within the last 2 years. Questions also addressed general health, age, sex, height, weight, and ethnic background. Participants were then asked to repeat the survey using the Internet platform again after 10-14 days. Following analysis of test group 1, we soft-launched the survey to a larger population (test group 2), through a local running club of 900 members via email platform. The same inclusion criteria applied, however, participants were asked to complete a repeat of the survey by telephone interview after 7-10 days. Selected key questions, important to clarify inclusion or exclusion from the wider genetics study, were selected to evaluate test-retest reliability. Reliability was quantified using the kappa coefficient for categorical data.ResultsIn response to the invitation, 28 participants accessed the survey from test group 1, 23 completed the Internet survey on the first occasion, and 20 completed the Internet retest within 10-21 days. Test-retest reliability scored moderate to almost perfect (kappa=.41 to .99) for 19/19 of the key questions analyzed. Following the invitation, 122 participants accessed the survey from test group 2, 101 completed the Internet survey on the first occasion, and 50 were randomly selected and contacted by email inviting them to repeat the survey by telephone interview. There were 33 participants that consented to the telephone interview and 30 completed the questionnaire within 7-10 days. Test-retest reliability scored moderate to almost perfect for 18/19 (kappa=.41 to .99) and slight for 1/19 of the key questions analyzed.

Project description:BackgroundExercise capacity is seriously reduced after stroke. While cardiopulmonary assessment and intervention strategies have been validated for the mildly and moderately impaired populations post-stroke, there is a lack of effective concepts for stroke survivors suffering from severe motor limitations. This study investigated the test-retest reliability and repeatability of cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) using feedback-controlled robotics-assisted treadmill exercise (FC-RATE) in severely motor impaired individuals early after stroke.Methods20 subjects (age 44-84 years, <6 month post-stroke) with severe motor limitations (Functional Ambulatory Classification 0-2) were selected for consecutive constant load testing (CLT) and incremental exercise testing (IET) within a powered exoskeleton, synchronised with a treadmill and a body weight support system. A manual human-in-the-loop feedback system was used to guide individual work rate levels. Outcome variables focussed on standard cardiopulmonary performance parameters. Relative and absolute test-retest reliability were assessed by intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), standard error of the measurement (SEM), and minimal detectable change (MDC). Mean difference, limits of agreement, and coefficient of variation (CoV) were estimated to assess repeatability.ResultsPeak performance parameters during IET yielded good to excellent relative reliability: absolute peak oxygen uptake (ICC?=0.82), relative peak oxygen uptake (ICC?=0.72), peak work rate (ICC?=0.91), peak heart rate (ICC?=0.80), absolute gas exchange threshold (ICC?=0.91), relative gas exchange threshold (ICC?=0.88), oxygen cost of work (ICC?=0.87), oxygen pulse at peak oxygen uptake (ICC?=0.92), ventilation rate versus carbon dioxide output slope (ICC?=0.78). For these variables, SEM was 4-13%, MDC 12-36%, and CoV 0.10-0.36. CLT revealed high mean differences and insufficient test-retest reliability for all variables studied.ConclusionsThis study presents first evidence on reliability and repeatability for CPET in severely motor impaired individuals early after stroke using a feedback-controlled robotics-assisted treadmill. The results demonstrate good to excellent test-retest reliability and appropriate repeatability for the most important peak cardiopulmonary performance parameters. These findings have important implications for the design and implementation of cardiovascular exercise interventions in severely impaired populations. Future research needs to develop advanced control strategies to enable the true limit of functional exercise capacity to be reached and to further assess test-retest reliability and repeatability in larger samples.

Project description:BackgroundNeurocognitive testing is an important concussion evaluation tool, but for neurocognitive tests to be useful, their psychometric properties must be well established. Test-retest reliability of computerized neurocognitive tests can influence their clinical utility. The reliability for a commonly used computerized neurocognitive test, CNS Vital Signs, is not well established. The purpose of this study was to examine test-retest reliability and reliable change indices for CNS Vital Signs in a healthy, physically active college population.HypothesisCNS Vital Signs yields acceptable test-retest reliability, with greater reliability between the second and third test administration compared with between the first and second administration.Study designCohort study.Level of evidenceLevel 3.MethodsForty healthy, active volunteers (16 men, 24 women; mean age, 21.05 ± 2.17 years) reported to a clinical laboratory for 3 sessions, 1 week apart. At each session, participants were administered CNS Vital Signs. Outcomes included standard scores for the following CNS Vital Signs domains: verbal memory, visual memory, psychomotor speed, cognitive flexibility, complex attention, processing speed, reaction time, executive functioning, and reasoning.ResultsParticipants performed significantly better on the second session and/or third session than they did on the first testing session on 6 of 9 neurocognitive domains. Pearson r test-retest correlations between sessions ranged from 0.11 to 0.87. Intraclass correlation coefficients ranged from 0.10 to 0.86.ConclusionClinicians should consider using reliable change indices to account for practice effects, identify meaningful score changes due to pathology, and inform clinical decisions.Clinical relevanceThis study highlights the importance of clinicians understanding the psychometric properties of computerized neurocognitive tests when using them in the management of sport-related concussion. If CNS Vital Signs is administered twice within a small time frame (such as 1 week), athletes should be expected to improve between the first and second administration.

Dataset Information

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

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

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

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets