Cory M Scheadler1, Matthew J Garver, Nicholas J Hanson. 1. 1Human Performance Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology and Health, Northern Kentucky University, Highland Heights, KY; 2Human Performance Laboratory, Department of Nutrition and Kinesiology, University of Central Missouri, Warrensburg, MO; and 3Department of Human Performance and Health Education, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: There is a plethora of gas sampling intervals available during cardiopulmonary exercise testing to measure peak oxygen consumption (V˙O2peak). Different intervals can lead to altered V˙O2peak. Whether differences are affected by the exercise protocol or subject sample is not clear. The purpose of this investigation was to determine whether V˙O2peak differed because of the manipulation of sampling intervals and whether differences were independent of the protocol and subject sample. METHODS: The first subject sample (24 ± 3 yr; V˙O2peak via 15-breath moving averages: 56.2 ± 6.8 mL·kg·min) completed the Bruce and the self-paced V˙O2max protocols. The second subject sample (21.9 ± 2.7 yr; V˙O2peak via 15-breath moving averages: 54.2 ± 8.0 mL·kg·min) completed the Bruce and the modified Astrand protocols. V˙O2peak was identified using five sampling intervals: 15-s block averages, 30-s block averages, 15-breath block averages, 15-breath moving averages, and 30-s block averages aligned to the end of exercise. Differences in V˙O2peak between intervals were determined using repeated-measures ANOVAs. The influence of subject sample on the sampling effect was determined using independent t-tests. RESULTS: There was a significant main effect of sampling interval on V˙O2peak (first sample Bruce and self-paced V˙O2max P < 0.001; second sample Bruce and modified Astrand P < 0.05). The difference in V˙O2peak between sampling intervals followed a similar pattern for each protocol and subject sample, with 15-breath moving average presenting the highest V˙O2peak. CONCLUSIONS: The effect of manipulating gas sampling intervals on V˙O2peak appears to be protocol and sample independent. These findings highlight our recommendation that the clinical and scientific community request and report the sampling interval whenever metabolic data are presented. The standardization of reporting would assist in the comparison of V˙O2peak.
INTRODUCTION: There is a plethora of gas sampling intervals available during cardiopulmonary exercise testing to measure peak oxygen consumption (V˙O2peak). Different intervals can lead to altered V˙O2peak. Whether differences are affected by the exercise protocol or subject sample is not clear. The purpose of this investigation was to determine whether V˙O2peak differed because of the manipulation of sampling intervals and whether differences were independent of the protocol and subject sample. METHODS: The first subject sample (24 ± 3 yr; V˙O2peak via 15-breath moving averages: 56.2 ± 6.8 mL·kg·min) completed the Bruce and the self-paced V˙O2max protocols. The second subject sample (21.9 ± 2.7 yr; V˙O2peak via 15-breath moving averages: 54.2 ± 8.0 mL·kg·min) completed the Bruce and the modified Astrand protocols. V˙O2peak was identified using five sampling intervals: 15-s block averages, 30-s block averages, 15-breath block averages, 15-breath moving averages, and 30-s block averages aligned to the end of exercise. Differences in V˙O2peak between intervals were determined using repeated-measures ANOVAs. The influence of subject sample on the sampling effect was determined using independent t-tests. RESULTS: There was a significant main effect of sampling interval on V˙O2peak (first sample Bruce and self-paced V˙O2max P < 0.001; second sample Bruce and modified Astrand P < 0.05). The difference in V˙O2peak between sampling intervals followed a similar pattern for each protocol and subject sample, with 15-breath moving average presenting the highest V˙O2peak. CONCLUSIONS: The effect of manipulating gas sampling intervals on V˙O2peak appears to be protocol and sample independent. These findings highlight our recommendation that the clinical and scientific community request and report the sampling interval whenever metabolic data are presented. The standardization of reporting would assist in the comparison of V˙O2peak.