Tuomo Tompuri1,2, Niina Lintu2, Kai Savonen1,3, Tomi Laitinen1, David Laaksonen4, Jarmo Jääskeläinen5, Timo A Lakka1,2,3. 1. Department of Clinical Physiology and Nuclear Medicine, Kuopio University Hospital and University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland. 2. Institute of Biomedicine/Physiology, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland. 3. Kuopio Research Institute of Exercise Medicine, Kuopio, Finland. 4. Department of Internal Medicine, Kuopio University Hospital, Kuopio, Finland. 5. Department of Pediatrics, Kuopio University Hospital and University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In the exercise testing measures of cardiorespiratory fitness need to be scaled by body size or composition to enable comparison between individuals. Traditionally used weight-proportional measures are potentially confounded by body adiposity that hampers their interpretation and applicability in the clinical assessment of cardiorespiratory fitness. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to find the most appropriate measure of body size or composition for scaling of measures of cardiorespiratory fitness among children. METHODS: We assessed body weight and height, maximal workload (W MAX ) and maximal oxygen uptake (VO2 MAX ) using cycle ergometer exercise test with respiratory gas analysis and body lean mass (LM) and fat mass (FM) by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and by bioimpedance analysis among 38 children. The data were analysed using Pearson's coefficients for correlation and stepwise linear regression models. RESULTS: Lean mass (r > 0.54) and height (r > 0.51) had stronger positive correlations with absolute W MAX and VO2 MAX than weight (r > 0.30) in girls and boys. None of the measures of body size or composition correlated with LM-proportional W MAX or VO2 MAX in girls or boys. Only LM correlated positively with height-proportional W MAX (r = 0.65) and VO2 MAX (r = 0.71) in boys. FM correlated negatively with weight-proportional W MAX (r < -0.58) and VO2 MAX (r < -0.64) in girls and boys. FM was even stronger determinant of weight-proportional W MAX (β = -0.68) and VO2 MAX (β = -0.61) than exercise performance in multivariate linear regression models. CONCLUSIONS: While assessing cardiorespiratory fitness, LM is the most appropriate measure of body size or composition for scaling of W MAX and VO2 MAX, because scaling by body weight introduces confounding by body adiposity.
BACKGROUND: In the exercise testing measures of cardiorespiratory fitness need to be scaled by body size or composition to enable comparison between individuals. Traditionally used weight-proportional measures are potentially confounded by body adiposity that hampers their interpretation and applicability in the clinical assessment of cardiorespiratory fitness. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to find the most appropriate measure of body size or composition for scaling of measures of cardiorespiratory fitness among children. METHODS: We assessed body weight and height, maximal workload (W MAX ) and maximal oxygen uptake (VO2 MAX ) using cycle ergometer exercise test with respiratory gas analysis and body lean mass (LM) and fat mass (FM) by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and by bioimpedance analysis among 38 children. The data were analysed using Pearson's coefficients for correlation and stepwise linear regression models. RESULTS: Lean mass (r > 0.54) and height (r > 0.51) had stronger positive correlations with absolute W MAX and VO2 MAX than weight (r > 0.30) in girls and boys. None of the measures of body size or composition correlated with LM-proportional W MAX or VO2 MAX in girls or boys. Only LM correlated positively with height-proportional W MAX (r = 0.65) and VO2 MAX (r = 0.71) in boys. FM correlated negatively with weight-proportional W MAX (r < -0.58) and VO2 MAX (r < -0.64) in girls and boys. FM was even stronger determinant of weight-proportional W MAX (β = -0.68) and VO2 MAX (β = -0.61) than exercise performance in multivariate linear regression models. CONCLUSIONS: While assessing cardiorespiratory fitness, LM is the most appropriate measure of body size or composition for scaling of W MAX and VO2 MAX, because scaling by body weight introduces confounding by body adiposity.
Authors: Kim D Lu; John Billimek; Ronen Bar-Yoseph; Shlomit Radom-Aizik; Dan M Cooper; Hoda Anton-Culver Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2016-06-16 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: Eero A Haapala; Petri Wiklund; Niina Lintu; Tuomo Tompuri; Juuso Väistö; Taija Finni; Ina M Tarkka; Titta Kemppainen; Alan R Barker; Ulf Ekelund; Soren Brage; Timo A Lakka Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2020-05
Authors: Eero A Haapala; Kristel Lankhorst; Janke de Groot; Maremka Zwinkels; Olaf Verschuren; Harriet Wittink; Frank Jg Backx; Anne Visser-Meily; Tim Takken Journal: Eur J Prev Cardiol Date: 2017-04-04 Impact factor: 7.804
Authors: Aapo Veijalainen; Eero A Haapala; Juuso Väistö; Marja H Leppänen; Niina Lintu; Tuomo Tompuri; Santeri Seppälä; Ulf Ekelund; Mika P Tarvainen; Kate Westgate; Søren Brage; Timo A Lakka Journal: Eur J Appl Physiol Date: 2019-09-18 Impact factor: 3.078