Total amount: € 0,00
HOW TO ORDER
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 1,111
ORIGINAL ARTICLES PHYSIOLOGY AND BIOMECHANICS
The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2010 December;50(4):385-94
Accuracy of polar F6 in estimating the energy cost of aerobic dance bench stepping in college-age females
Lowe A. L. 1, Lloyd L. K. 1, Miller B. K. 2, Mccurdy K. W. 1, Pope M. L. 1 ✉
1 The Human Performance Laboratory, Department of Health, Physical Education, and Recreation, Texas State University-San Marcos, San Marcos, TX, USA;
2 Department of Management, Texas State University-San Marcos, San Marcos, TX, USA
AIM: This study: 1) examined the accuracy of the Polar F6 for estimating energy expenditure (EE) in a sample of college-age women during aerobic dance bench stepping (ADBS) using predicted maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max) and maximal heart rate (HRmax), and 2) determined whether the use of actual measures of VO2max and HRmax improves the accuracy of the Polar F6 for estimating EE.
METHODS: Thirty-two females had their VO2max and HRmax predicted by the Polar F6 heart rate monitor (HRM), and then performed a graded maximal exercise treadmill test to determine their actual VO2max and HRmax. The participants then followed a 20-min ADBS routine while stepping up and down off of a 15.24-cm bench at a cadence of 126 beats.min-1. During ADBS, the participants wore two F6 HRM that simultaneously collected data. To estimate EE, one HRM utilized their predicted VO2max and HRmax (PHRM) while the other HRM utilized their actual VO2max and HRmax (AHRM).
RESULTS: The predicted HRmax significantly overestimated actual HRmax by 3.75 beats.min-1 on average, and the predicted VO2max overestimated actual VO2max by 2.63 ml.kg-1.min-1 on average (P<0.01). However, there were no significant differences between the PHRM and AHRM (P≥0.05). When compared to indirect calorimetry, the PHRM and AHRM significantly overestimated average EE by 28% (2.4 kcal.min-1) and 27% (2.0 kcal.min-1), respectively (P<0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Even when using actual measures of VO2max and HRmax, the Polar F6 is inaccurate in estimating EE during ADBS for college-age females.