Skip to main content
main-content

01.06.2014 | Original Article | Ausgabe 6/2014

European Journal of Applied Physiology 6/2014

Prediction of peak oxygen uptake from differentiated ratings of perceived exertion during wheelchair propulsion in trained wheelchair sportspersons

Zeitschrift:
European Journal of Applied Physiology > Ausgabe 6/2014
Autoren:
Victoria L. Goosey-Tolfrey, Thomas A. W. Paulson, Keith Tolfrey, Roger G. Eston
Wichtige Hinweise
Communicated by Jean-René Lacour.

Abstract

Purpose

To assess the validity of predicting peak oxygen uptake (\( {\dot{\text{V}}}{\text{O}}_{{\text{2peak}}}\)) from differentiated ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) obtained during submaximal wheelchair propulsion.

Methods

Three subgroups of elite male wheelchair athletes [nine tetraplegics (TETRA), nine paraplegics (PARA), eight athletes without spinal cord injury (NON-SCI)] performed an incremental speed exercise test followed by graded exercise to exhaustion (\( {\dot{\text{V}}}{\text{O}}_{{\text{2peak}}}\) test). Oxygen uptake (\( {\dot{\text{V}}}{\text{O}}_2\)), heart rate (HR) and differentiated RPE (Central RPEC, Peripheral RPEP and Overall RPEO) were obtained for each stage. The regression lines for the perceptual ranges 9–15 on the Borg 6–20 scale ratings were performed to predict \( {\dot{\text{V}}}{\text{O}}_{{\text{2peak}}}\).

Results

There were no significant within-group mean differences between measured \( {\dot{\text{V}}}{\text{O}}_{{\text{2peak}}}\) (mean 1.50 ± 0.39, 2.74 ± 0.48, 3.75 ± 0.33 L min−1 for TETRA, PARA and NON-SCI, respectively) and predicted \( {\dot{\text{V}}}{\text{O}}_{{\text{2peak}}}\) determined using HR or differentiated RPEs for any group (P > 0.05). However, the coefficients of variation (CV %) between measured and predicted \( {\dot{\text{V}}}{\text{O}}_{{\text{2peak}}}\) using HR showed high variability for all groups (14.3, 15.9 and 9.7 %, respectively). The typical error ranged from 0.14 to 0.68 L min−1 and the CV % between measured and predicted \( {\dot{\text{V}}}{\text{O}}_{{\text{2peak}}}\) using differentiated RPE was ≤11.1 % for TETRA, ≤7.5 % for PARA and ≤20.2 % for NON-SCI.

Conclusions

Results suggest that differentiated RPE may be used cautiously for TETRA and PARA athletes when predicting \( {\dot{\text{V}}}{\text{O}}_{{\text{2peak}}}\) across the perceptual range of 9–15. However, predicting \( {\dot{\text{V}}}{\text{O}}_{{\text{2peak}}}\) is not recommended for the NON-SCI athletes due to the large CV %s (16.8, 20.2 and 18.0 %; RPEC, RPEP and RPEO, respectively).

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

★ PREMIUM-INHALT
e.Med Interdisziplinär

Mit e.Med Interdisziplinär erhalten Sie Zugang zu allen CME-Fortbildungen und Fachzeitschriften auf SpringerMedizin.de. Zusätzlich können Sie eine Zeitschrift Ihrer Wahl in gedruckter Form beziehen – ohne Aufpreis.

Weitere Produktempfehlungen anzeigen
Literatur
Über diesen Artikel

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 6/2014

European Journal of Applied Physiology 6/2014 Zur Ausgabe
  1. Sie können e.Med Allgemeinmedizin 14 Tage kostenlos testen (keine Print-Zeitschrift enthalten). Der Test läuft automatisch und formlos aus. Es kann nur einmal getestet werden.

Neu im Fachgebiet Arbeitsmedizin