Literature DB >> 28542090

Five-Kilometer Time Trial Reliability of a Nonmotorized Treadmill and Comparison of Physiological and Perceptual Responses vs. a Motorized Treadmill.

Hunter S Waldman1, Alex J Heatherly2, Ashton F Waddell2, Ben M Krings1, Eric K OʼNeal2.   

Abstract

Waldman, HS, Heatherly, AJ, Waddell, AF, Krings, BM, and O'Neal, EK. Five-kilometer time trial reliability of a nonmotorized treadmill and comparison of physiological and perceptual responses vs. a motorized treadmill. J Strength Cond Res 32(5): 1455-1461, 2018-This study examined the reliability of running performance across 3 nonmotorized treadmill (NMT) 5-km time trials (TTs) and physiological, gait, and perceptual differences at a 5-km pace for both NMT and motorized treadmills (MTs). Ten male runners experienced in road racing who had never run on an NMT completed 3 TT to establish personal best 5-km pace. In a later session, participants ran at this pace for 5 minutes on the NMT while metabolic, gait, and perceptual measures were recorded and then ran at outdoor 5-km personal best pace on an MT at 1% grade (counter-balanced crossover design). Intraclass correlation (ICC = 0.95) between the TT1 and TT2 was strong but improved between TT2 and TT3 (ICC = 0.99) with considerable reduction in variability. Nonmotorized treadmill resulted in a 24% slower pace (10.6 ± 1.5 vs. 13.9 ± 2.6 km·h; p < 0.001), shorter stride length (1.02 ± 0.10 vs. 1.27 ± 0.18 m; p < 0.001), and decreased cadence (175 ± 12 vs. 181 ± 13 steps per·minute; p = 0.01). However, V[Combining Dot Above]O2, respiratory exchange ratio (RER), lactate concentration, and heart rate did not differ between modalities (NMT = 3.4 ± 0.4 L·min, 0.96 ± 0.04, 6.9 ± 3.7 mmol, 172 ± 10 b·min; MT = 3.4 ± 0.5 L·min, 0.96 ± 0.04, 5.7 ± 3.4 mmol, 170 ± 10 b·min). rate of perceived exertion (RPE) for legs, breathing, and overall did not differ between treadmill types. A familiarization session should be included for TT using NMT. Other than gait and pace characteristics similar responses were elicited by both treadmills when running at 5-km pace. However, with these considerations, NMT TT of 4-km might be more appropriate in matching MT 5-km TT duration without altering physiological responses significantly.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 28542090     DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001993

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Strength Cond Res        ISSN: 1064-8011            Impact factor:   3.775


  4 in total

Review 1.  Training Considerations for Optimising Endurance Development: An Alternate Concurrent Training Perspective.

Authors:  Kenji Doma; Glen B Deakin; Mortiz Schumann; David J Bentley
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 11.136

2.  Non-motorized Treadmill Running Is Associated with Higher Cardiometabolic Demands Compared with Overground and Motorized Treadmill Running.

Authors:  Robert B Edwards; Paul J Tofari; Stuart J Cormack; Douglas G Whyte
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2017-11-14       Impact factor: 4.566

3.  Treadmill and Running Speed Effects on Acceleration Impacts: Curved Non-Motorized Treadmill vs. Conventional Motorized Treadmill.

Authors:  Alberto Encarnación-Martínez; Ignacio Catalá-Vilaplana; Rafael Berenguer-Vidal; Roberto Sanchis-Sanchis; Borja Ochoa-Puig; Pedro Pérez-Soriano
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-05-20       Impact factor: 3.390

4.  The Effect of Acetaminophen on Running Economy and Performance in Collegiate Distance Runners.

Authors:  Riley P Huffman; Gary P Van Guilder
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-03-02       Impact factor: 3.390

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.