These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Influence of testing protocol on ventilatory thresholds and cycling performance.
    Author: Amann M, Subudhi A, Foster C.
    Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc; 2004 Apr; 36(4):613-22. PubMed ID: 15064589.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To compare the ventilatory response of two incremental exercise tests and determine their predictive validity on 40-km cycle time trial (40K) mean power output (40Kavgwatts). METHODS: Fifteen male cyclists performed two incremental exercise tests (T50x3:100 W +50 W x 3(-1) min, T25x1:20 W + 25 W x min(-1)) and a 40K over an 8-d period. Key variable was power at ventilatory threshold (VT). For VT determination during each test we used: VE/VO2 method, first clear breakpoint on the VE/VCO2 plot, V-slope method, RER = 1, and RER = 0.95. RESULTS: VO2max during T50x3 and T25x1 was not different (66.6 vs 67.6 mL x kg(-1) x min(-1)), although T25x1 peak power output (MaxT25x1; 402 W) was significantly higher than MaxT50x3 (363 W). T50x3 and T25x1 VT power outputs indicated that the power output at T25x1:RER = 1 and T25x1:RER = 0.95 were significantly higher compared with T50x3 (324 vs 304 W and 282 vs 264 W, respectively). Regression analyses between T50x3 variables and 40Kavgwatts were significant for T50x3:V-slope (R2 = 0.37; SEE 20.2 W), T50x3:VE/VO2 (R2 = 0.64; SEE 15.3 W), T50x3:RER = 0.95 (R2 = 0.42; SEE 19.4 W), T50x3:RER = 1 (R2 = 0.45; SEE 18.8 W), and MaxT50x3 (R2 = 0.51; SEE 17.8 W). Regression analyses between T25x1 variables and 40Kavgwatts were significant for T25x1:V-slope (R2 = 0.63; SEE 15.4 W), T25x1:VE/VO2 (R2 = 0.64; SEE 15.2 W), T25x1:RER = 0.95 (R2 = 0.53; SEE 17.4 W), T25x1:RER = 1 (R2 = 0.57; SEE 16.7 W), and MaxT25x1 (R2 = 0.65; SEE 15.0 W). There was no significant difference between 40Kavgwatts (282 W) and power outputs at T50x3:VE/VO2 (277 W), T50x3:V-slope (289 W), T25x1:VE/VO2 (276 W), and T25x1:RER = 0.95 (282 W). CONCLUSION: Generally, T25x1 based VT variables were superior to T50x3 variables regarding the prediction of 40Kavgwatts. We conclude that the VE/VO2 method is protocol independent and a valid 40Kavgwatts predictor.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]