Literature DB >> 32729096

An Examination and Critique of Current Methods to Determine Exercise Intensity.

Nicholas A Jamnick1, Robert W Pettitt2, Cesare Granata3, David B Pyne4, David J Bishop5.   

Abstract

Prescribing the frequency, duration, or volume of training is simple as these factors can be altered by manipulating the number of exercise sessions per week, the duration of each session, or the total work performed in a given time frame (e.g., per week). However, prescribing exercise intensity is complex and controversy exists regarding the reliability and validity of the methods used to determine and prescribe intensity. This controversy arises from the absence of an agreed framework for assessing the construct validity of different methods used to determine exercise intensity. In this review, we have evaluated the construct validity of different methods for prescribing exercise intensity based on their ability to provoke homeostatic disturbances (e.g., changes in oxygen uptake kinetics and blood lactate) consistent with the moderate, heavy, and severe domains of exercise. Methods for prescribing exercise intensity include a percentage of anchor measurements, such as maximal oxygen uptake ([Formula: see text]), peak oxygen uptake ([Formula: see text]), maximum heart rate (HRmax), and maximum work rate (i.e., power or velocity-[Formula: see text] or [Formula: see text], respectively), derived from a graded exercise test (GXT). However, despite their common use, it is apparent that prescribing exercise intensity based on a fixed percentage of these maximal anchors has little merit for eliciting distinct or domain-specific homeostatic perturbations. Some have advocated using submaximal anchors, including the ventilatory threshold (VT), the gas exchange threshold (GET), the respiratory compensation point (RCP), the first and second lactate threshold (LT1 and LT2), the maximal lactate steady state (MLSS), critical power (CP), and critical speed (CS). There is some evidence to support the validity of LT1, GET, and VT to delineate the moderate and heavy domains of exercise. However, there is little evidence to support the validity of most commonly used methods, with exception of CP and CS, to delineate the heavy and severe domains of exercise. As acute responses to exercise are not always predictive of chronic adaptations, training studies are required to verify whether different methods to prescribe exercise will affect adaptations to training. Better ways to prescribe exercise intensity should help sport scientists, researchers, clinicians, and coaches to design more effective training programs to achieve greater improvements in health and athletic performance.

Entities:  

Year:  2020        PMID: 32729096     DOI: 10.1007/s40279-020-01322-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sports Med        ISSN: 0112-1642            Impact factor:   11.136


  35 in total

Review 1.  Cognitive benefits of exercise interventions: an fMRI activation likelihood estimation meta-analysis.

Authors:  Qian Yu; Fabian Herold; Benjamin Becker; Ben Klugah-Brown; Yanjie Zhang; Stephane Perrey; Nicola Veronese; Notger G Müller; Arthur F Kramer; Liye Zou
Journal:  Brain Struct Funct       Date:  2021-03-06       Impact factor: 3.270

2.  Evaluating the Accuracy of Using Fixed Ranges of METs to Categorize Exertional Intensity in a Heterogeneous Group of Healthy Individuals: Implications for Cardiorespiratory Fitness and Health Outcomes.

Authors:  Danilo Iannetta; Daniel A Keir; Federico Y Fontana; Erin Calaine Inglis; Anmol T Mattu; Donald H Paterson; Silvia Pogliaghi; Juan M Murias
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2021-04-26       Impact factor: 11.136

3.  The ability of energy recovery in professional soccer players is increased by individualized low-intensity exercise.

Authors:  Jihwan Hwang; Na-Ram Moon; Oliver Heine; Woo-Hwi Yang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-06-30       Impact factor: 3.752

Review 4.  An Examination and Critique of Subjective Methods to Determine Exercise Intensity: The Talk Test, Feeling Scale, and Rating of Perceived Exertion.

Authors:  Daniel Bok; Marija Rakovac; Carl Foster
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2022-05-04       Impact factor: 11.928

5.  Correlation Properties of Heart Rate Variability during a Marathon Race in Recreational Runners: Potential Biomarker of Complex Regulation during Endurance Exercise.

Authors:  Thomas Gronwald; Bruce Rogers; Laura Hottenrott; Olaf Hoos; Kuno Hottenrott
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2021-10-01       Impact factor: 2.988

6.  Assessment of Peak Oxygen Uptake with a Smartwatch and its Usefulness for Training of Runners.

Authors:  Peter Düking; Bas Van Hooren; Billy Sperlich
Journal:  Int J Sports Med       Date:  2022-01-30       Impact factor: 2.997

7.  Rethinking aerobic exercise intensity prescription in adults with spinal cord injury: time to end the use of "moderate to vigorous" intensity?

Authors:  Michael J Hutchinson; Victoria L Goosey-Tolfrey
Journal:  Spinal Cord       Date:  2021-12-08       Impact factor: 2.473

8.  Effects of a single bout of walking on postprandial triglycerides in men of Chinese, European and Japanese descent: a multisite randomised crossover trial.

Authors:  Chihiro Nagayama; Stephen F Burns; David J Stensel; Alice E Thackray; Masaki Takahashi; Masashi Miyashita
Journal:  BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med       Date:  2020-12-16

9.  Network Physiology of Exercise: Vision and Perspectives.

Authors:  Natàlia Balagué; Robert Hristovski; Maricarmen Almarcha; Sergi Garcia-Retortillo; Plamen Ch Ivanov
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2020-12-11       Impact factor: 4.566

10.  Effects of Individualized Low-Intensity Exercise and Its Duration on Recovery Ability in Adults.

Authors:  Doowon Lee; Ju-Yeon Son; Hyo-Myeong Ju; Ji-Hee Won; Seung-Bo Park; Woo-Hwi Yang
Journal:  Healthcare (Basel)       Date:  2021-03-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.