Loading…
A comparison of practical assessment methods to determine treadmill, cycle and elliptical ergometer VO2peak
This investigation compared estimated and predicted peak oxygen consumption (VO 2peak ) and maximal heart rate (HR max ) among the treadmill, cycle ergometer and elliptical ergometer. Seventeen women (mean ± SE : 21.9 ± .3 yrs) exercised to exhaustion on all modalities. ACSM metabolic equations were...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of strength and conditioning research 2010-05, Vol.24 (5), p.1325-1331 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | |
---|---|
cites | |
container_end_page | 1331 |
container_issue | 5 |
container_start_page | 1325 |
container_title | Journal of strength and conditioning research |
container_volume | 24 |
creator | Mays, Ryan J. Boér, Nicholas F. Mealey, Lisa M. Kim, Kevin H. Goss, Fredric L. |
description | This investigation compared estimated and predicted peak oxygen consumption (VO
2peak
) and maximal heart rate (HR
max
) among the treadmill, cycle ergometer and elliptical ergometer. Seventeen women (mean ±
SE
: 21.9 ± .3 yrs) exercised to exhaustion on all modalities. ACSM metabolic equations were used to estimate VO
2peak
. Digital displays on the elliptical ergometer were used to estimate VO
2peak
. Two individual linear regression methods were used to predict VO
2peak
: 1) two steady state heart rate (HR) responses up to 85% of age-predicted HR
max
, and 2) multiple steady state/non-steady state HR responses up to 85% of age-predicted HR
max
. Estimated VO
2peak
for the treadmill (46.3 ± 1.3 ml · kg
−1
· min
−1
) and the elliptical ergometer (44.4 ± 1.0 ml · kg
−1
· min
−1
) did not differ. The cycle ergometer estimated VO
2peak
(36.5 ± 1.0 ml · kg
−1
· min
−1
) was lower (p < .001) than the estimated VO
2peak
values for the treadmill and elliptical ergometer. Elliptical ergometer VO
2peak
predicted from steady state (51.4 ± .8 ml · kg
−1
· min
−1
) and steady state/non-steady state (50.3 ± 2.0 ml · kg
−1
· min
−1
) models were higher than estimated elliptical ergometer VO
2peak
, p < .01. HR
max
and estimates of VO
2peak
were similar between the treadmill and elliptical ergometer, thus cross-modal exercise prescriptions may be generated. The use of digital display estimates of submaximal oxygen uptake for the elliptical ergometer may not be an accurate method for predicting VO
2peak
. Health-fitness professionals should use caution when utilizing submaximal elliptical ergometer digital display estimates to predict VO
2peak
. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181c7c677 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>pubmedcentral</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4420018</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4420018</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_44200183</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqljU9LAzEUxIMotv75Bh7eB3Brstk024sgRREvHhSvy2vy2sYmm5BEod_eil48e5qB-c0MY1eCz4QSi5unl-WMr7iQJEUvjDZzrY_YVCgpm67t9fHB83nX9FyICTsr5Z3zViklT9mk5XIhpdJTtrsDE0PC7EocIa4hZTTVGfSApVApgcYKgeo22gI1gqVKObiRoGZCG5z312D2xhPgaIG8d-mnT3kTwzcNb89tItxdsJM1-kKXv3rObh_uX5ePTfpYBbLm8JTRDym7gHk_RHTD32R022ETP4euazkXvfz3wBcaimoU</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>A comparison of practical assessment methods to determine treadmill, cycle and elliptical ergometer VO2peak</title><source>HEAL-Link subscriptions: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins</source><creator>Mays, Ryan J. ; Boér, Nicholas F. ; Mealey, Lisa M. ; Kim, Kevin H. ; Goss, Fredric L.</creator><creatorcontrib>Mays, Ryan J. ; Boér, Nicholas F. ; Mealey, Lisa M. ; Kim, Kevin H. ; Goss, Fredric L.</creatorcontrib><description>This investigation compared estimated and predicted peak oxygen consumption (VO
2peak
) and maximal heart rate (HR
max
) among the treadmill, cycle ergometer and elliptical ergometer. Seventeen women (mean ±
SE
: 21.9 ± .3 yrs) exercised to exhaustion on all modalities. ACSM metabolic equations were used to estimate VO
2peak
. Digital displays on the elliptical ergometer were used to estimate VO
2peak
. Two individual linear regression methods were used to predict VO
2peak
: 1) two steady state heart rate (HR) responses up to 85% of age-predicted HR
max
, and 2) multiple steady state/non-steady state HR responses up to 85% of age-predicted HR
max
. Estimated VO
2peak
for the treadmill (46.3 ± 1.3 ml · kg
−1
· min
−1
) and the elliptical ergometer (44.4 ± 1.0 ml · kg
−1
· min
−1
) did not differ. The cycle ergometer estimated VO
2peak
(36.5 ± 1.0 ml · kg
−1
· min
−1
) was lower (p < .001) than the estimated VO
2peak
values for the treadmill and elliptical ergometer. Elliptical ergometer VO
2peak
predicted from steady state (51.4 ± .8 ml · kg
−1
· min
−1
) and steady state/non-steady state (50.3 ± 2.0 ml · kg
−1
· min
−1
) models were higher than estimated elliptical ergometer VO
2peak
, p < .01. HR
max
and estimates of VO
2peak
were similar between the treadmill and elliptical ergometer, thus cross-modal exercise prescriptions may be generated. The use of digital display estimates of submaximal oxygen uptake for the elliptical ergometer may not be an accurate method for predicting VO
2peak
. Health-fitness professionals should use caution when utilizing submaximal elliptical ergometer digital display estimates to predict VO
2peak
.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1064-8011</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1533-4287</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181c7c677</identifier><identifier>PMID: 20393357</identifier><language>eng</language><ispartof>Journal of strength and conditioning research, 2010-05, Vol.24 (5), p.1325-1331</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Mays, Ryan J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boér, Nicholas F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mealey, Lisa M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Kevin H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Goss, Fredric L.</creatorcontrib><title>A comparison of practical assessment methods to determine treadmill, cycle and elliptical ergometer VO2peak</title><title>Journal of strength and conditioning research</title><description>This investigation compared estimated and predicted peak oxygen consumption (VO
2peak
) and maximal heart rate (HR
max
) among the treadmill, cycle ergometer and elliptical ergometer. Seventeen women (mean ±
SE
: 21.9 ± .3 yrs) exercised to exhaustion on all modalities. ACSM metabolic equations were used to estimate VO
2peak
. Digital displays on the elliptical ergometer were used to estimate VO
2peak
. Two individual linear regression methods were used to predict VO
2peak
: 1) two steady state heart rate (HR) responses up to 85% of age-predicted HR
max
, and 2) multiple steady state/non-steady state HR responses up to 85% of age-predicted HR
max
. Estimated VO
2peak
for the treadmill (46.3 ± 1.3 ml · kg
−1
· min
−1
) and the elliptical ergometer (44.4 ± 1.0 ml · kg
−1
· min
−1
) did not differ. The cycle ergometer estimated VO
2peak
(36.5 ± 1.0 ml · kg
−1
· min
−1
) was lower (p < .001) than the estimated VO
2peak
values for the treadmill and elliptical ergometer. Elliptical ergometer VO
2peak
predicted from steady state (51.4 ± .8 ml · kg
−1
· min
−1
) and steady state/non-steady state (50.3 ± 2.0 ml · kg
−1
· min
−1
) models were higher than estimated elliptical ergometer VO
2peak
, p < .01. HR
max
and estimates of VO
2peak
were similar between the treadmill and elliptical ergometer, thus cross-modal exercise prescriptions may be generated. The use of digital display estimates of submaximal oxygen uptake for the elliptical ergometer may not be an accurate method for predicting VO
2peak
. Health-fitness professionals should use caution when utilizing submaximal elliptical ergometer digital display estimates to predict VO
2peak
.</description><issn>1064-8011</issn><issn>1533-4287</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqljU9LAzEUxIMotv75Bh7eB3Brstk024sgRREvHhSvy2vy2sYmm5BEod_eil48e5qB-c0MY1eCz4QSi5unl-WMr7iQJEUvjDZzrY_YVCgpm67t9fHB83nX9FyICTsr5Z3zViklT9mk5XIhpdJTtrsDE0PC7EocIa4hZTTVGfSApVApgcYKgeo22gI1gqVKObiRoGZCG5z312D2xhPgaIG8d-mnT3kTwzcNb89tItxdsJM1-kKXv3rObh_uX5ePTfpYBbLm8JTRDym7gHk_RHTD32R022ETP4euazkXvfz3wBcaimoU</recordid><startdate>20100501</startdate><enddate>20100501</enddate><creator>Mays, Ryan J.</creator><creator>Boér, Nicholas F.</creator><creator>Mealey, Lisa M.</creator><creator>Kim, Kevin H.</creator><creator>Goss, Fredric L.</creator><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20100501</creationdate><title>A comparison of practical assessment methods to determine treadmill, cycle and elliptical ergometer VO2peak</title><author>Mays, Ryan J. ; Boér, Nicholas F. ; Mealey, Lisa M. ; Kim, Kevin H. ; Goss, Fredric L.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_44200183</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Mays, Ryan J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boér, Nicholas F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mealey, Lisa M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Kevin H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Goss, Fredric L.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of strength and conditioning research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Mays, Ryan J.</au><au>Boér, Nicholas F.</au><au>Mealey, Lisa M.</au><au>Kim, Kevin H.</au><au>Goss, Fredric L.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A comparison of practical assessment methods to determine treadmill, cycle and elliptical ergometer VO2peak</atitle><jtitle>Journal of strength and conditioning research</jtitle><date>2010-05-01</date><risdate>2010</risdate><volume>24</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>1325</spage><epage>1331</epage><pages>1325-1331</pages><issn>1064-8011</issn><eissn>1533-4287</eissn><abstract>This investigation compared estimated and predicted peak oxygen consumption (VO
2peak
) and maximal heart rate (HR
max
) among the treadmill, cycle ergometer and elliptical ergometer. Seventeen women (mean ±
SE
: 21.9 ± .3 yrs) exercised to exhaustion on all modalities. ACSM metabolic equations were used to estimate VO
2peak
. Digital displays on the elliptical ergometer were used to estimate VO
2peak
. Two individual linear regression methods were used to predict VO
2peak
: 1) two steady state heart rate (HR) responses up to 85% of age-predicted HR
max
, and 2) multiple steady state/non-steady state HR responses up to 85% of age-predicted HR
max
. Estimated VO
2peak
for the treadmill (46.3 ± 1.3 ml · kg
−1
· min
−1
) and the elliptical ergometer (44.4 ± 1.0 ml · kg
−1
· min
−1
) did not differ. The cycle ergometer estimated VO
2peak
(36.5 ± 1.0 ml · kg
−1
· min
−1
) was lower (p < .001) than the estimated VO
2peak
values for the treadmill and elliptical ergometer. Elliptical ergometer VO
2peak
predicted from steady state (51.4 ± .8 ml · kg
−1
· min
−1
) and steady state/non-steady state (50.3 ± 2.0 ml · kg
−1
· min
−1
) models were higher than estimated elliptical ergometer VO
2peak
, p < .01. HR
max
and estimates of VO
2peak
were similar between the treadmill and elliptical ergometer, thus cross-modal exercise prescriptions may be generated. The use of digital display estimates of submaximal oxygen uptake for the elliptical ergometer may not be an accurate method for predicting VO
2peak
. Health-fitness professionals should use caution when utilizing submaximal elliptical ergometer digital display estimates to predict VO
2peak
.</abstract><pmid>20393357</pmid><doi>10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181c7c677</doi></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1064-8011 |
ispartof | Journal of strength and conditioning research, 2010-05, Vol.24 (5), p.1325-1331 |
issn | 1064-8011 1533-4287 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4420018 |
source | HEAL-Link subscriptions: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins |
title | A comparison of practical assessment methods to determine treadmill, cycle and elliptical ergometer VO2peak |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-05T10%3A33%3A52IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-pubmedcentral&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20comparison%20of%20practical%20assessment%20methods%20to%20determine%20treadmill,%20cycle%20and%20elliptical%20ergometer%20VO2peak&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20strength%20and%20conditioning%20research&rft.au=Mays,%20Ryan%20J.&rft.date=2010-05-01&rft.volume=24&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=1325&rft.epage=1331&rft.pages=1325-1331&rft.issn=1064-8011&rft.eissn=1533-4287&rft_id=info:doi/10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181c7c677&rft_dat=%3Cpubmedcentral%3Epubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4420018%3C/pubmedcentral%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_44200183%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/20393357&rfr_iscdi=true |