Home > Journals > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness > Past Issues > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2002 March;42(1) > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2002 March;42(1):8-13

CURRENT ISSUE
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Reprints

THE JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE AND PHYSICAL FITNESS

A Journal on Applied Physiology, Biomechanics, Preventive Medicine,
Sports Medicine and Traumatology, Sports Psychology


Indexed/Abstracted in: Chemical Abstracts, CINAHL, Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 1,215


eTOC

 

Original articles  EXERCISE PHYSIOLOGY AND BIOMECHANICS


The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2002 March;42(1):8-13

Copyright © 2009 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Physiological responses at 0% and 10% treadmill incline using the RPE estimation-production paradigm

Green J. M., Crews T. R., Bosak A. M., Peveler W.

From the Department of Physical Education and Recreation Western Kentucky University, Bowling Green, KY, USA


PDF  


Back­ground. ­This ­study exam­ined phys­io­log­i­cal respons­es dur­ing 0% and 10% ­inclined tread­mill exer­cise at pre­scribed rat­ings of per­ceived exer­tion (RPE) ­using the per­cep­tu­al esti­ma­tion-pro­duc­tion par­a­digm.
Meth­ods. ­RPE’s ­were esti­mat­ed dur­ing a ­Bruce tread­mill ­test to voli­tion­al exhaus­tion. Sub­jects ­then pro­duced indi­vid­u­al­ly pre­scribed ­RPE’s (asso­ciat­ed ­with 50% and 70% V.O2max) dur­ing lev­el (0% ­grade) and ­inclined (10% ­grade) tread­mill exer­cise. ­Heart ­rate ­response (HR) and oxy­gen con­sump­tion (V.O2) ­were com­pared ­between esti­ma­tion (EST), lev­el pro­duc­tion (LPR), and ­incline pro­duc­tion (IPR) ­trials ­using one-way repeat­ed meas­ures ANO­VA. ­Results ­were con­sid­ered sig­nif­i­cant at p≤0.05.
­Results. At 50% V.O2max, HR and V.O2 ­were not sig­nif­i­cant­ly dif­fer­ent ­between EST (134±13 b·min-1, 27.1±5.6 ml·kg·min-1) and IPR (139±18 b·min-1, 30.6±11.2 ml·kg·min-1). How­ev­er, HR and VO2 dur­ing LPR (123±20 b·min-1, 24.3±8.8 ml·kg·min-1) ­were sig­nif­i­cant­ly low­er ­than IPR. For 70% V.O2max, HR and V.O2 ­were not sig­nif­i­cant­ly dif­fer­ent ­between EST (168±9 b·min-1, 42.1±9.4 ml·kg·min-1) and IPR (169±14 b·min-1, 41.1±10.2 ml·kg·min-1). How­ev­er HR and V.O2 dur­ing LPR (155±17 b·min-1, 35.1±8.1 ml·kg·min-1) ­were sig­nif­i­cant­ly lower ­than dur­ing EST and IPR.
Con­clu­sions. ­Results sug­gest phys­io­log­i­cal respons­es dur­ing RPE esti­ma­tion-pro­duc­tion ­trials cor­re­spond bet­ter ­when esti­ma­tion and pro­duc­tion ­trials ­were per­formed at a sim­i­lar tread­mill ­incline. For exer­cise pre­scrip­tion pur­pos­es, RPE esti­ma­tions ­made dur­ing ­inclined tread­mill exer­cise may ­require adjust­ments to ­achieve appro­pri­ate inten­sities dur­ing lev­el tread­mill exer­cise.

top of page

Publication History

Cite this article as

Corresponding author e-mail