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: Rating of perceived exertion as a tool for prescribing and self regulating interval training: a pilot study.
    Author: Ciolac EG, Mantuani SS, Neiva CM, Verardi C, Pessôa-Filho DM, Pimenta L.
    Journal: Biol Sport; 2015 Jun; 32(2):103-8. PubMed ID: 26028809.
    Abstract:
    The aim of the present study was to analyse the usefulness of the 6-20 rating of perceived exertion (RPE) scale for prescribing and self-regulating high-intensity interval training (HIT) in young individuals. Eight healthy young subjects (age = 27.5±6.7 years) performed maximal graded exercise testing to determine their maximal and reserve heart rate (HR). Subjects then performed two HIT sessions (20 min on a treadmill) prescribed and regulated by their HR (HR: 1 min at 50% alternated with 1 min at 85% of reserve HR) or RPE (RPE: 1 minute at the 9-11 level [very light-fairly light] alternated with 1 minute at the 15-17 level [hard-very hard]) in random order. HR response and walking/running speed during the 20 min of exercise were compared between sessions. No significant difference between sessions was observed in HR during low- (HR: 135±15 bpm; RPE: 138±20 bpm) and high-intensity intervals (HR: 168±15 bpm; RPE: 170±18 bpm). Walking/running speed during low- (HR: 5.7±1.2 km · h(-1); RPE: 5.7±1.3 km · h(-1)) and high-intensity intervals (HR: 7.8±1.9 km · h(-1); RPE: 8.2±1.7 km · h(-1)) was also not different between sessions. No significant differences were observed in HR response and walking/running speed between HIT sessions prescribed and regulated by HR or RPE. This finding suggests that the 6-20 RPE scale may be a useful tool for prescribing and self-regulating HIT in young subjects.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]