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: Assessment of the reproducibility of performance testing on an air-braked cycle ergometer.
    Author: Palmer GS, Dennis SC, Noakes TD, Hawley JA.
    Journal: Int J Sports Med; 1996 May; 17(4):293-8. PubMed ID: 8814512.
    Abstract:
    The purposes of this study were (I) to assess the reproducibility of endurance performance testing on an air-braked cycle ergometer, and (II) to compare laboratory performances to performances in road races. Ten well-trained, competitive cyclists (peak power output [PPO] 443 +/- 37 W, [values are mean +/- SD]) undertook either: (I) three 20 km and three 40 km time trials (TT) on an air braked ergometry system (Kingcycle) (n = 6), and/or (II) three 40 km laboratory TT and two 40 km road TT competitions (n = 8). The time taken for the laboratory simulated 20 km and 40 km TT rides were highly reproducible (coefficient of variation 1.1 +/- 0.9% and 1.0 +/- 0.5%, respectively). However, the mean power output and heart rate were significantly different (p < 0.0001) between the 20 km and 40 km TT (327.5 +/- 16.9 vs 303.9 +/- 14.9 W and 171.4 +/- 5.1 vs 168.3 +/- 4.4 beats/min, respectively). A strong relationship (r = 0.99, p < 0.001) was observed between the mean cycling time and the average sustained power output. A significant correlation (r = 0.98, p < 0.001) was also observed between laboratory and road race times, although road race times were, on average, some 8% slower. These findings indicate that the Kingcycle ergometry system can be used as a reliable method of assessing short term endurance cycling performance.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]