Jeremy Coquart1, Montassar Tabben2, Abdulaziz Farooq3, Claire Tourny2, Roger Eston4. 1. Faculty of Sport Sciences and Physical Education, University of Rouen, CETAPS, Boulevard Siegfried, 76821, Mont Saint Aignan Cedex, France. jeremy.coquart@yahoo.com. 2. Faculty of Sport Sciences and Physical Education, University of Rouen, CETAPS, Boulevard Siegfried, 76821, Mont Saint Aignan Cedex, France. 3. Aspetar-Orthopaedic and Sports Medicine Hospital, Doha, Qatar. 4. Alliance for Research in Exercise, Nutrition and Physical Activity, Sansom Institute for Health Research, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recently, several authors have proposed the use of a submaximal 'perceptually regulated exercise test' (PRET) to predict maximal oxygen uptake ([Formula: see text]). The PRET involves asking the individual to self-regulate a series of short bouts of exercise corresponding to pre-set ratings of perceived exertion (RPE). The individual linear relationship between RPE and oxygen uptake (RPE:[Formula: see text]) is then extrapolated to the [Formula: see text], which corresponds to the theoretical maximal RPE (RPE20). Studies suggest that prediction accuracy from this method may be better improved during a second PRET. Similarly, some authors have recommended an extrapolation to RPE19 rather than RPE20. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the meta-analysis was to examine the validity of the method of predicting [Formula: see text] from the RPE:[Formula: see text] during a PRET, and to determine the level of agreement and accuracy of predicting [Formula: see text] from an initial PRET and retest using RPE19 and RPE20. DATA SOURCES: From a systematic search of the literature, 512 research articles were identified. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: The eligible manuscripts were those which used the relationship between the RPE≤15 and [Formula: see text], and used only the Borg's RPE scale. PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Ten studies (n = 274 individuals) were included. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: For each study, actual and predicted [Formula: see text] from four subgroup outcomes (RPE19 in the initial test, RPE19 in the retest, RPE20 in the initial test, RPE20 in the retest) were identified, and then compared. The magnitude of the difference regardless of subgroup outcomes was examined to determine if it is better to predict [Formula: see text] from extrapolation to RPE19 or RPE20. The magnitude of differences was examined for the best PRET (test vs retest). RESULTS: The results revealed that [Formula: see text] may be predicted from RPE:[Formula: see text] during PRET in different populations and in various PRET modalities, regardless of the subgroup outcomes. To obtain greater accuracy of predictions, extrapolation to RPE20 during a retest may be recommended. LIMITATIONS: The included studies reported poor selection bias and data collection methods. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS: The [Formula: see text] may be predicted from RPE:[Formula: see text] during PRET, especially when [Formula: see text] is extrapolated to RPE20 during a second PRET.
BACKGROUND: Recently, several authors have proposed the use of a submaximal 'perceptually regulated exercise test' (PRET) to predict maximal oxygen uptake ([Formula: see text]). The PRET involves asking the individual to self-regulate a series of short bouts of exercise corresponding to pre-set ratings of perceived exertion (RPE). The individual linear relationship between RPE and oxygen uptake (RPE:[Formula: see text]) is then extrapolated to the [Formula: see text], which corresponds to the theoretical maximal RPE (RPE20). Studies suggest that prediction accuracy from this method may be better improved during a second PRET. Similarly, some authors have recommended an extrapolation to RPE19 rather than RPE20. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the meta-analysis was to examine the validity of the method of predicting [Formula: see text] from the RPE:[Formula: see text] during a PRET, and to determine the level of agreement and accuracy of predicting [Formula: see text] from an initial PRET and retest using RPE19 and RPE20. DATA SOURCES: From a systematic search of the literature, 512 research articles were identified. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: The eligible manuscripts were those which used the relationship between the RPE≤15 and [Formula: see text], and used only the Borg's RPE scale. PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Ten studies (n = 274 individuals) were included. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: For each study, actual and predicted [Formula: see text] from four subgroup outcomes (RPE19 in the initial test, RPE19 in the retest, RPE20 in the initial test, RPE20 in the retest) were identified, and then compared. The magnitude of the difference regardless of subgroup outcomes was examined to determine if it is better to predict [Formula: see text] from extrapolation to RPE19 or RPE20. The magnitude of differences was examined for the best PRET (test vs retest). RESULTS: The results revealed that [Formula: see text] may be predicted from RPE:[Formula: see text] during PRET in different populations and in various PRET modalities, regardless of the subgroup outcomes. To obtain greater accuracy of predictions, extrapolation to RPE20 during a retest may be recommended. LIMITATIONS: The included studies reported poor selection bias and data collection methods. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS: The [Formula: see text] may be predicted from RPE:[Formula: see text] during PRET, especially when [Formula: see text] is extrapolated to RPE20 during a second PRET.
Authors: Harrison J L Evans; Katia E Ferrar; Ashleigh E Smith; Gaynor Parfitt; Roger G Eston Journal: J Sci Med Sport Date: 2014-03-19 Impact factor: 4.319