Home > Riviste > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness > Fascicoli precedenti > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2001 September;41(3) > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2001 September;41(3):312-7



Per abbonarsi PROMO
Sottometti un articolo
Segnala alla tua biblioteca




Original articles   

The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2001 September;41(3):312-7


lingua: Inglese

The reliability and validity of the Åstrand nomogram and linear extrapolation for deriving V.O2max from submaximal exercise data

Macsween A.

From the Department of Physiotherapy, Podiatry and Radiography, Division of Physiotherapy, Glasgow Caledonian University, Faculty of Health, City Campus, Glasgow, UK


Background. While the accept­ed meas­ure of aero­bic pow­er ­remains the V.O2max ­this ­test is extreme­ly demand­ing ­even for ath­letes. There are seri­ous prac­ti­cal and eth­i­cal con­cerns in attempt­ing ­such test­ing in non-ath­let­ic or ­patient pop­u­la­tions. An alter­na­tive meth­od of meas­ur­ing aero­bic pow­er in ­such pop­u­la­tions is ­required. A lim­it­ed ­body of ­work ­exists eval­u­at­ing the accu­ra­cy of the Åstrand-Ryhming nomo­gram and lin­e­ar extrap­o­la­tion of the ­heart ­rate/oxy­gen ­uptake ­plot. Issues ­exist in ­terms of ­both equip­ment ­employed and sam­ple num­bers.
Methods. Twenty-­five nor­mal sub­jects (­mean age 28.6, ­range 22-50) com­plet­ed 52 ­trials (Bruce tread­mill pro­to­col) meet­ing strin­gent cri­te­ria for V.O2max per­for­mance. Respiratory gas­es ­were meas­ured ­with a port­able gas anal­y­ser on a ­five-sec­ sam­ple peri­od. The ­data was ana­lysed to ­allow com­par­i­son of the reli­abil­ity and valid­ity of lin­e­ar extrap­o­la­tions to ­three esti­mates of ­heart ­rate max­i­mum ­with the Åstrand nomo­gram pre­dic­tion.
Results. Extrapolation was pref­er­able yield­ing intraclass correlation co-effi­cients (ICC) of 0.9433 com­par­able to ­that of the ­observed V.O2max at 0.9443 and a ­bias of -1.1 ml · min-1 · kg-1 rep­re­sent­ing a 2.19% under­es­ti­mate.
Conclusions. This ­study pro­vides empir­i­cal evi­dence ­that extrap­o­la­tion of sub­max­i­mal ­data can be ­employed ­with con­fi­dence for ­both clin­i­cal mon­i­tor­ing and ­research pur­pos­es. With the use of port­able equip­ment and sub­max­i­mal test­ing the ­scope for ­future ­research in numer­ous pop­u­la­tions and non-labor­a­to­ry envi­ron­ments is con­sid­er­ably ­increased.

inizio pagina